are visual programming languages necessarily more professional that object oriented programming languages ?

Answer 1

First off we need to clarify what you mean by "Visual" and "Object Oriented".

I will throw out two definitions here:

Visual - a progam and design system that uses diagramming to express algorithms.

Object Oriented - a program and design system that uses controlled methods as the only access path to data.

With these definitions, we realize that the two sets are not exclusive. We then add another definition:

Professional -
# engaged in a profession or engaging in as a profession or means of livelihood; "the professional man or woman possesses distinctive qualifications ...
# a person engaged in one of the learned professions
# an athlete who plays for pay
# engaged in by members of a profession; "professional occupations include medicine and the law and teaching"
# master: an authority qualified to teach apprentices
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Of these definitions, the first, second and fifth apply: as a means of livelihood is the most important.

Now, I would say that Object Oriented programming runs contrary to that goal, but does meet up with the fifth. (you can make more money by billing more time for non-OOP software! But, it isn't very usable by others in the craft).

Visual Programming, though, cannot easily express basic algorithms (you can have a SORT box, but how in blazes do you draw the steps of a quicksort easily? Most descriptions are partly verbal as well.) The MOST visual approach to programming is the old-fashioned "Flow Chart" (dating back over 50 years now). Since "Visual Programming" is so damned difficult, you can certainly make more money at, and thus, I deem it "MORE PROFESSIONAL".

If you haven't figured it out yet, this post is (mostly) tongue in cheek, and is meant to be humorous.

I actually assume that you mean "Visual" in the sense of Microsoft Visual tools, and Object Oriented, well, I am not too sure -- Visual C++, C# and most of the other offerings ARE Object Oriented, so there is no dichotomy.

Answer 2

Object oriented languages are initially about problem analysis - suggest you research the topic of "object oriented analysis and design" and also "UML". The UML (Universal Modeling Language) is a visual modeling language used to generate object oriented designs ...

So it's visual and OO : )

Confused? Also, 'visual' languages like Visual Basic .NET are object oriented under the covers - all the 'visual' aspect does for you is give you a GUI to drag and drop controls onto a design surface - it's generating OO code under the covers.

Sad to say, but if you don't understand object oriented languages to some extent you won't be perceived as a great programmer... so don't skimp on that learning : ) Read some of the "The Object Primer" by Scott Ambler, and "Head First Design Patterns" (can't remember the author) and also "UML Distilled, 3rd Ed.pdf" by Martin Fowler, then you will be well on your way!

Answer 3

Most real software development is done by small companies and contractors who cannot afford the Latest and Greatest Hardware. That means there is a strong bias among programmers towards packages which just work. I am not trying to suggest that visual programming languages are LESS professional than object oriented ones, but frankly the people I hear who are happiest comparing languages and types in that way are either still trying to find a job or effortlessly conforming to the stereotype of the clueless MBA.

Answer 4

Not necessarily, that's the beauty of programming. The code is what you make of it.

However speaking from a programmers perspective "low-level" languages are less limited in their syntax which is generally speaking neither Visual or OO programming. It's been my experience both Visual and OO programming is just easier to pick up, learn, manipulate and make look "pretty". Visual programming potentially being the "prettier" of the two.