I don’t understand the need for no-code software development.
In my admittedly limited personal experience, any domain experts that were worth their salt were smart, and learning a programming language or two to the level required to make useful code contributions wasn’t really a problem.
A physicist often learns some programming language anyway, somewhere along their educational path.
I would be suspicious about the intelligence of someone who refused to use appropriate tools for specifying software behaviors claiming it too difficult. A baseball pro knows how to work and has a likely good mind, as does a culinary expert. I just don’t know anyone GOOD at a given field who isn’t also hardworking and smart.
What’s the big deal?
Why do we seek no-code software development solutions when code is the most precise concise manner to describe software behaviors?
Positive thing about no code is you can take a reasonably intelligent person with almost no technical no how but a willingness to learn and have them creating real software with a good low code solution in a month. Of course they will likely need someone with real experience to guide them for the first 3+ months. You need a really good training program though. Often the sales pitch for what these applications can deliver is overly aggressive though and the user is going to have to start to learn software architecture concepts eventually so everything is not a mess. I moved from full stack development to low-code and have been really impressed. There are of course limits, you can only use the components that have been created for the platform but overall you can produce some impressive applications. There are some very large corporations run by very smart people that have gone all in on low-code for the front end.
> Positive thing about no code is you can take a reasonably intelligent person with almost no technical no how but a willingness to learn and have them creating real software with a good low code solution in a month.
I would expect that of any one trying to learn code tbh. Physics students in uni learn c in less than a month.
no-code software can work just fine if the scope is small - and that's where you find the target audience.
"back in the day" it was super easy to just slap together a GUI software using Visual Studio, Delphi, or whatever you had at hand. Really simple editors to make the GUI, and with basic programming knowledge, you programmed the various functions. Easy as pie.
If you wanted some software to run on a website, you could do the same with Java Applets - if you knew some java.
Again, this is stuff that non-programmers could learn in a fairly short amount of time. Business analysts, professors, engineers, whatever.
But what about these days? Well, even if you're smart - even if you know some basic programming - EVEN if you have the will, webdev is a fucking nightmare if you want something that's not static or very basic. The hoops you have to jump through, just to get your idea ported to a website.
These people are not going to write large applications or services that needs to be fast, scale big, be fully tested, etc. They mostly need some quick and dirty apps that can solve things, and without a too steep learning curve.
I would be suspicious about the intelligence of someone who refused to use appropriate tools for specifying software behaviors claiming it too difficult. A baseball pro knows how to work and has a likely good mind, as does a culinary expert. I just don’t know anyone GOOD at a given field who isn’t also hardworking and smart.
What’s the big deal? Why do we seek no-code software development solutions when code is the most precise concise manner to describe software behaviors?