The Future of Programming


Comments are closed.

Really liked this talk - very engaging delivery. The demo app looked a little like a MS Access app circa 95, BUT I liked this as a thought exercise around what programming could look like and be like in the future.

Thanks Nate!

Some interesting concepts and a slick, well-delivered talk, but the demo app was slightly underwhelming. Maybe I couldn't appreciate its full power from such a short clip, but it looked very Yahoo Pipes to me. A wholly suitable topic for the final keynote and Nate deserves a lot of credit for being brave enough to think beyond how we develop software today.

Anonymous at 20:14 on 19 Feb 2015

Thanks Nate; that was a well presented talk, packed with some brave ideas! It did make a lot of sense to me. A bit dubious about the demo app; but I get it though! :)

A good talk to attend. Felt a little slow at times, but that might be the delivery. Interesting topic though for sure, great to try and think about programming in different ways

Anonymous at 09:08 on 20 Feb 2015

The talk had no real structure. There was no beginning or end just lots of middle.

It looked to me that Nate had just discovered noodle programming and implemented it.

Like the annoymous comment, it was interesting, but it lacked structure - felt like more of a ramble of what he was thinking. Kinda left feeling a "what point were you trying to make"

Some interesting points to takeaway. Would have liked a bit more detail.

I thought this talk had a strong start but soon tailed off towards the end with a demo which I felt added no value to the talk.

Adam at 09:41 on 20 Feb 2015

Talk started well, but was lacking a clear message and didn't provide any clear message or conclusion. I missed the point of the 2nd half of the talk with the video demos

Definitely started well, but it felt like technical issues put Nate off his stride a little towards the end.

I didn't really get the point of the talk. Presented idea was neither new, nor shown practical application.

App looked cool though - clicky touchy brushy.

Anonymous at 11:32 on 20 Feb 2015

Felt like a shameless demo of a single tool. I don't feel that it gave many good insights or advice.

Anonymous at 12:09 on 20 Feb 2015

"Look what I did, how clever of me!" Nice tool but didn't think it had and relevance. Very flat delivery after initially strong start

Made me (re)think about the standard paradigms.

Maybe we CAN do this better...

I thought the presentation of the presentation was very good. I didn't really feel like the discussion really built up to anything though.

Anonymous at 16:15 on 20 Feb 2015

Interesting. Questioned everything but didn't really deliver in the end.

I especially enjoyed the first half - I think we really do need to question whether our technologies are great just because we've invested so much time in mastering them. Could just be Stockholm Syndrome, right? The actual demo of a possible alternative "future for programming" was a bit anticlimactic, but perhaps anything would have been - or else maybe I'm just not a visual enough thinker and was missing all my lovely text...

Breaking rules! Great talk.

Always refreshing to hear someone question basic assumptions and programming patterns and concepts. Maybe a bit too ambitious?

interesting talk, not what I was expecting definitely gave me a lots to consider.

best talk of the event for me

Loved his speaking style and found him really engaging as a speaker. I enjoy being challenged so really appreciated the talk. The demo was cool, if a little self indulgent. Would have liked a more comprehensive conclusion.

After a good start, I had expected some clearer conclusions on where programming would go. I felt that there was no real structure. At points, it actually felt that Nate was disillusioned with the industry.

The delivery of this keynote was very confident, and the concept of getting us to question the way we are working from more than a methodological view was interesting.

But the demo felt like an afterthought and the presentation didn't finish with a 'message' like most keynotes do/should. Maybe it just lost speed after the insightful start.

Hi everyone, thanks for the feedback. The conclusion was definitely a little rushed, as they were trying to get me off-stage at that point (it was certainly a lot of concepts to cover in half an hour).

However, I'm pretty disappointed at the fact that the amazing and patently obvious benefits of describing systems as data structures was completely lost on almost everyone in the entire audience. A few examples:

- Statically analyzing programs by query
- Refactoring by query
- Structural diffing of any element to sub-expression granularity
- Analyzing changes over time in (a) what/how APIs are called, (b) what tests would/wouldn't have passed, etc.

In short, we have amazing tools for working with data, but the state of tools for working with code is shit. I'm gonna stop here, because otherwise this is gonna turn into a doctoral thesis...

Nate has a great presentational style - and he's clearly put a lot of thought into his ideas. It's quite a brave thing to put forward your ideas on the future - and even more so to be specific about your predictions.

I wasn't wholly sure that the tech demo added to the presentation - I don't think it supported his points in the way that he wanted.

Anonymous at 23:28 on 22 Feb 2015

Didn't really get it, to be honest, although it did raise some interesting questions about the future.
Are the state of tools for working with code so bad?
I Would have liked Nate to have a but more time to deliver his point, and perhaps for some discussion after.

Was a good and relatively light way to end the day which raised some interesting ideas

Interesting thought experiment, but very little I could take away and learn from. Good presentation style though.

Anonymous at 16:12 on 23 Feb 2015

Started well, then took off on a tangent. The start did have a lot of promise but at the end, I didn't really get the point.

As the PHP world moves more towards "Rethinking best practices" this talk played nicely into that mindset. With the ever growing demand of having more complex structures and procedures, the need to be able to reason about these things becomes increasingly difficult. The declarative style which Nate showed makes it infinitely more easy to do so. Other movements have tried to simplify this too, FP in general and JS tools like ReactJS. The fact that this was a visual representation of this concept was awesome.

Not a great deal of structure to the talk. Seemed to flit about quite a bit. Maybe its because of technical issues but I didn't engage with the topic as much as I thought I would.