Hello! I'm one of the foudners of New Byte Order (the company behind Luna). We think the same - the visual representation is natural for high level abstraction model, while textual code fits really well when dealing with low-level stuff. And Luna is one language with both of these representations. If you want to learn more and have any specific questions, I would love to answer them.
"Luna is the world’s first programming language featuring two exchangeable representations: textual and visual, which you can freely switch at any time."
I have not made an extensive research, but this doesn't sound right to me. The SAS Enterprise Guide version of the SAS language came first (and probably others). In one panel you have the visual version while the other has the traditional SAS text language. There are other environments live Learntomod where one panel shows Javascript while the other has a visual, Scratch-like representation of the same code.
Just like Luna, they consist of an IDE coupled with two languages each: the visual and the textual.
Why is that they don't make that argument false?
I would love to be proven that I'm wrong, but I don't think they allow for bidirectional, lossless conversion, namely graph -> text and text -> graph? Do they? If so, then you are right, the statement is wrong and we will change it on our website.
