Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 5th Jun 2012 10:50 UTC
General Development "I got interested in the Soviet space program and was interested to discover that the software on the Buran spacecraft circa 1988 was written in Prolog. Does anyone know what languages might have been used in earlier missions, especially the Mars PrOP-M rover missions of the early 1970s which were somewhat autonomous and could navigate obstacles?" Absolutely fascinating.
Thread beginning with comment 520911
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: DRAKON
by Radio on Tue 5th Jun 2012 19:39 UTC in reply to "RE: DRAKON"
Radio
Member since:
2009-06-20

I am completely flabbergasted that they use a visual coding language. Many people tried the concept, and it never had any success (I remember how much criticism received Google (now MIT) App Inventor) - and now, we have a prime example, moreover in actual use, moreover in critical applications.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: DRAKON
by Treza on Tue 5th Jun 2012 20:22 in reply to "RE[2]: DRAKON"
Treza Member since:
2006-01-11

I am completely flabbergasted that they use a visual coding language. Many people tried the concept, and it never had any success (I remember how much criticism received Google (now MIT) App Inventor) - and now, we have a prime example, moreover in actual use, moreover in critical applications.


Visual programming languages/methods are actually used _a lot_ in critical applications.

For example :
http://www.esterel-technologies.com/products/scade-suite/

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: DRAKON
by jebb on Tue 5th Jun 2012 21:36 in reply to "RE[3]: DRAKON"
jebb Member since:
2006-07-06

Not to mention the ladder logic type of programming used in millions of industrial setups around the world to program PLCs and such.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: DRAKON
by Neolander on Tue 5th Jun 2012 21:22 in reply to "RE[2]: DRAKON"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Maybe DRAKON was kind of like LabView : everyone hates it, but it takes quite a bit of effort not to use it anyway since it essentially has support for everything a computer can interface with. Or maybe them crazy Soviets actually found a way to make visual programming an attractive way to write and debug programs...

Edited 2012-06-05 21:24 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: DRAKON
by kwan_e on Tue 5th Jun 2012 23:41 in reply to "RE[3]: DRAKON"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

Maybe DRAKON was kind of like LabView : everyone hates it, but it takes quite a bit of effort not to use it anyway since it essentially has support for everything a computer can interface with. Or maybe them crazy Soviets actually found a way to make visual programming an attractive way to write and debug programs...


From what is written about it, it's more like DRAKON was used just as a diagramming documentation for algorithm communication, which is not exactly a "visual programming language".

DRAKON doesn't seem to be that difficult and they consciously avoided the problems of traditional flow charts. They're also limited in scope, unlike UML.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: DRAKON
by BeamishBoy on Wed 6th Jun 2012 01:11 in reply to "RE[2]: DRAKON"
BeamishBoy Member since:
2010-10-27

As pointed out by Treza, visual programming languages are actually quite common in many specialized areas. An excellent case in point is The Mathworks' Simulink, which is used extensively in engineering applications.

Come to think of it, I'm sure I saw Simulink in use when I interned at a hedge fund many moons ago as a rudimentary market dynamics simulator for stock index futures.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: DRAKON
by kwan_e on Wed 6th Jun 2012 15:19 in reply to "RE[3]: DRAKON"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

Come to think of it, I'm sure I saw Simulink in use when I interned at a hedge fund many moons ago as a rudimentary market dynamics simulator for stock index futures.


They quickly abandoned it when they couldn't simulate a perpetual motion machine that generates forever growing profits.

Reply Parent Score: 2