Output-centric programming paradigms such as Direct Manipulation Programming, Programming By Demonstration, and Programming By Example enable users to author programs by constructing an intended output. However, sometimes the purpose of a programming interaction is to discover an “intended output” in the first place (e.g., exploratory data analysis, improvisational creative coding, early-stage prototyping). We argue that one role for output-centric programming here is scaffolding the user in demonstrating their next program editing step by selecting among possible modifications to their current program. We call this Programming By Scaffolded Demonstration (PBSD). To explore PBSD, we built Perpend, a programming environment for p5.js. In a user study with nine artists, we juxtapose Perpend with an existing Direct Manipulation editor, exploring how participants used Perpend to situate themselves within a space of possible programs, shift focus between program text and visual output, and shape their exploration by modifying their program structure.

Whether a programmer with code or a potter with clay, practitioners engage in an ongoing process of working and reasoning with materials. Existing discussions in HCI have provided rich accounts of these practices and processes, which we synthesize into three themes: (1) reciprocal discovery of goals and materials, (2) local knowledge of materials, and (3) annotation for holistic interpretation. We then apply these design principles generatively to the domain of version control to present Quickpose: a version control system for creative coding. In an in-situ, longitudinal study of Quickpose guided by our themes, we collected usage data, version history, and interviews. Our study explored our participants’ material interaction behaviors and the initial promise of our proposed measures for recognizing these behaviors. Quickpose is an exploration of version control as material interaction, using existing discussions to inform domain-specific concepts, measures, and designs for version control systems.

Researchers who build creativity support tools (CSTs) define abstractions and software representations that align with user needs to give users the power to accomplish tasks. However, these specifications also structure and limit how users can and should think, act, and express themselves. Thus, tool designers unavoidably exert power over their users by enacting a “normative ground” through their tools. Drawing on interviews with 11 creative practitioners, tool designers, and CST researchers, we offer a definition of empowerment in the context of creative practice, build a preliminary theory of how power relationships manifest in CSTs, and explain why researchers have had trouble addressing these concepts in the past. We re-examine CST literature through a lens of power and argue that mitigating power imbalances at the level of technical design requires enabling users in both vertical movement along levels of abstraction as well as horizontal movement between tools through interoperable representations. A lens of power is one possible orientation that lets us recognize the methodological shifts required towards building “artistic support tools.”