> Luna is the world’s first programming language featuring two equivalent syntax representations, visual and textual.
Is this true? This is not my strong domain but I'm sure there are such programming languages.
Is this true? This is not my strong domain but I'm sure there are such programming languages.
Edit: Gotta say, I love x3 the design/aesthetic/presentation of the Luna language.
I seem to remember a visual javascript thing which had the same feature.
The in-development GP language can alternate between blocks and text: https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/GP_(programming_language)
For example: https://blueprintue.com/blueprint/h6gkslt6/
It also depends what we consider human readable: Does it mean that some or many or most humans can read it? It's a custom plain text format[0] that is perhaps a little bit less readable that HTML. I have been reading and writing Pd patches in textual representation (and I'm human). Not sure if that's an answer to the question.
I've seen a Scheme editor that does visual representation, slightly similar to Scratch, but can't remember the name of it.
AsciiDots is both visual and textual (although it's not two different syntaxes).
#N canvas 340 73 884 380 10;
#N canvas 0 0 1362 686 sendchord 0;
#X msg 241 135 60;
#X msg 240 167 64;
#X msg 241 200 67;
#X obj 191 173 bng 15 250 50 0 empty empty empty 17 7 0 10 -262144
-1 -1;
#X obj 283 450 bng 15 250 50 0 empty empty empty 17 7 0 10 -262144
-1 -1; #N canvas 0 0 100 100 100 10;
#X obj 0 40 print;
#X msg 0 20 hello world;
#X obj 0 0 loadbang;
#X connect 1 0 0 0;
#X connect 2 0 1 0;
I think the readability of Pd is horrible, but the question was whether it was human readable at all.