Block Diagrams for Detailed and Large Functional Programming Programs

Block diagrams are featured in the Engineering industry as a high level and black box strategy. They are able to display the expected system operations where systems, inputs, and outputs are synonymous with functions. By appearance, the translation is near nothing between this systems context and that of a functional programming program.

A block diagram is to use boxes for every process. Sub-processes are contained in a process without annotation. This is helping to make block diagrams easy to read. Declaring and defining functions is another block diagram as encapsulating a multiple function sequence is similar to function composition that is observed in the functional programming paradigm. As such, a box diagram is a swappable toolkit to represent large programs since boxes are reusable in block diagram illustrations (like functions in functional programming). At both horizontal ends around a box, the input and output types are annotated for data types. This is consistent with data types that are prominent in functional programming code. Alongside operators to combine data, this is all the definitions to introducing the block diagram for functional programming representation. The shortness is example of brevity of the block diagram, and this is reflected as making the block diagram easy to read. In the following sections, I will explore a comparison versus other diagrams that are now common within programming practise.

The biggest hurdle is answering “What’s better than existing diagrams?”. To put light onto new features, I will make comparisons between the block diagram and observed diagrams within the programming community. These diagrams are separated by the portrayed elements. For UML class diagrams, objects are displaying attributes and relationships with other objects. For UML sequence diagrams, object interactions are displayed in chronology. For control flow diagrams, business logic is ordered and connected in sequence. For ER diagrams, database relations are enumerated in an easy-to-read way. I will compare the block diagram to these other diagrams in a functional programming context in order to see if the block diagram is better in context (for direct comparison, you may skip to the corresponding section).

This diagram is characterized for enumerating object attributes, object methods, and relations. In a functional programming environment, types are declared as opposed to objects and enclosed properties and methods. Thus, the UML class diagram is allotting space for things that are not modelled with a functional programming program. Block diagrams display data types in input and output of every process. Since the types are not encapsulating attributes nor methods, no more detail is required about the types. In regards to object relations, the block diagram is able to make connections by putting one type on either system end while the other type is on the other end. This is all requirements to the relations observed in functional programming: one type is usually processed to another type with an arbitrary function, and this is fully displayed in a block diagram. In summary, box diagrams are a suitable replacement for UML class diagrams in order to display everything necessary without additional bulk.

The UML sequence diagram is attributive to the relations of classes as an object or procedure is called at the topmost level. It is able to indicate the relations between object classes during the procedure. In functional programming, one may translate this to putting types across the top margin while functions are displayed as boxes encapsulating and sequencing data instances as they are passed through function boxes, between type translations, and into aggregations. This is enough to illustrate a functional programming system with a diagram for every function, but the block diagram is able to do the same with fewer constraints. In the block diagram, the top margin is removed. This is easier to read since there is no separate location for checking types. Additionally, a really long system is not as much problematic to display in a box diagram while it is maybe not possible in a UML sequence diagram. For a long sequence (of functions), the sequence diagram is constricted to continue downwards only while the block diagram is able to be stopped at one horizontal end then continued by compactly reversing direction or resetting at the other end. Thus, the block diagram is better for illustrating large programs.

The control flow diagram is to be detailed in the logic within a procedure. Loops, conditionals, and sequences are clearly displayed by arrow directions and different shapes. Unlike the other diagrams explored before, control flow diagrams are as detailed as pseudo-code. Box diagrams are not the same in endeavour. As UML class and sequence diagrams, box diagrams are managing more encapsulations. In box diagrams and not control flow diagrams, types are annotated for data for type checking and consistency. One can put type labels in the input and output of control flow diagram nodes, but this is another boxed diagram. I would argue that box diagrams are good for managing large systems in a declarative way as a control flow diagram is good for managing smaller procedures (in an imperative way).

The ER diagrams are good for displaying all attributes for every relation and to other relations with options like sub-typing (and weak entities), ternary relations, and aggregations. ER diagrams are very specific about what data is available, but this is not what is sought. A functional programming program is not sequenced by drafting only the data that’s involved. Thus, the boxed diagram is better suited to sequence functional programming programs.

That’s it! The boxed diagram is more appropriate for drafting program sequences than all the other above diagrams examined! If anybody has another diagram to compare, I would like to read that comparison as review.

Before the end, I will finish with a reminder of why is a diagram good at all. When the program is getting very large, functions are more easily organized with diagram representations. Diagrams are thus helpful for determining “In which module, is the most appropriate to declare a function?”, “Did you repeat a function in your code?”, and “Can you write a function by a composition of others?”.

Related posts:

For the second of our spotlights on Singapore’s cleantech sector, we met 27-year-old David Pong to learn about how his startup WateROAM, a water innovation social enterprise that develops and…

I have seen a few pieces written about how ‘things can never go back to normal’ after this pandemic. A very insightful Medium post predicted the great onslaught of forces that will soon converge to…

Mahameru88 merupakan situs terbaik yang tidak di ragukan lagi eksistensi nya di dunia Situs Online saat ini , pastikan kalian bermain di situs yang bertanggung jawab. Mahameru88 memiliki patnership…