[pacificmint]

I realized at some point that when people at work draw on whiteboards it usually ends up as boxes and lines between boxes.

But after thinking about it, it feels natural, because usually we talk about "Things" and the "Connections" between them.

Could be a companies org chart, a family tree, a network diagram, abstract things like processes. It's all "Things" and "Connections".

Maybe that's why graph theory has so many applications. Because at the end, it's all just graphs with vertices and edges.

[Bost]

> Because at the end, it's all just graphs with vertices and edges.

That's not the end. At the end there are just objects and morphisms between them. Graphs (with their edges and vertices) are just a special category of... Well, have a look at "Category Theory".

[ninetyninenine]

Well programming itself with text doesn't have boxes and lines. So there's other isomorphisms to represent this concept.

[TeMPOraL]

Of course it is. At a low level, AST is lines and boxes. So is a trace of control flow over time.

Code is downstream of thinking, which makes it downstream of lines and boxed.

[sen]

Programming is the lines, and the boxes is the data you’re working with (generally).

[yunohn]

Programming, especially imperative, is essentially boxes (statements, function calls) and lines (control flow). That’s why algorithms can be represented as flowcharts.

[mejutoco]

One can also think as an assembly instruction as origin and destination (line) and an operation (instruction).