Peter Bowyer wrote: > At 11:47 13/09/2006, Arthur wrote: > >> I can imagine an introductory course that was in fact more a >> *reading* course than a writing course - that spent a good deal of >> its time analyzing the code of relatively straightforward, but >> interesting, working applications. The satellite view, before we >> attempt to descend to a finer resolution. > > > That's a lot like how I learned to program. I bought a book > (Professional PHP - nothing like an intro book!) and once I'd read > some basics I went in and wrote a proper application - an ecard > script, following the outline of Perl code that I'd read previously > (without being able to write). That way I learned from someone else > (apprenticeship) and wrote something that was *useful* when finished > (encouraging me to learn).
Myself as well. My first "major" Python project was simply a port of some Java code to Python - a 3d math library. Read/write - read the Java, write the Python. But in the end I had something actually useful, to an extent I could not possibly have accomplished at that point on a write/write basis. All this of course makes Open Source of central importance. It happens that the 3d Java library I wanted to port was not open - nice API docs, no source. Luckily someone in Japan had taken upon themselves to do a functionally equivalent Open Source version of the library, .i.e. creating functional source working backward from the API. As it happens, on a *read* basis, about the first thing one can expect to encounter and need to explain (maybe after the doc string) is the "import" statement. To me this feels exactly right. OTOH, a recent post on the Python3000 list - discussing the fate of raw_input() - re-iterates the position that an understanding of the import statement is something that belongs way, way down the road - in a way that was much to sure of itself, for my taste. That one point - where the "import" statement belongs, pedagogically - seems to in some way represent the quake line of different points of view. Bucky might recognize this fact as a symptom of a pre-synergistic stage of things. But one side or the other always needs to lose some surety in order to make a first move in the direction of synergy.. You first ... whoever you is ;) Art > When studying physics I found the same approach worked, taking a > real-world application generated enthusiasm for learning esoteric > subjects. If you enjoy learning for the sake of knowledge I guess > this approach isn't needed; otherwise I believe it to be the most > effective approach. > > Peter > _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
