>>12
programmers have been wishing this for years.
No. I don't. I see major disadvantages to graphic programming languages, besides the obvious one that encourates retards to program and makes them and managers (subclass of retard) think programming is like drawing crap at school.
1. It'll force 2D (or even 3D) structures for loops, data structures, and whatever you want. What if you require more dimensions? This will be a mess to lay out; you'll end up needing bridges and planes and everything. You're thinking of how to count from 1 to 100, or maybe how to quicksort with it, but think a very large, complex application with loads of complex nested classes and 7 indentation levels. It's more likely than you think. This will become a mess if we make it so that you need to define or iterate graphically.
2. Ever realized text is hard to read when laid downward, harder to read when laid upward, and a pain in the ass when laid backward? The only easy direction to read text is forward (because it's the one we're used to read and write). We read words, not characters.
3. Ever heard of spaghetti code? Welcome to real spaghetti. We don't have gotos, we have fucking mazes. (Mazes considered harmful.)
4. People without good spatial abilities may fail.
5. You require a special editor to edit or even view it. A good programming language shouldn't require a special editor, much less a viewer. A program should be easy to port and convert, and you should be able to open it from everywhere, with anything.
There's probably more issues with it, but I haven't taken this too seriously to consider it and find them.