kirby urner wrote:
I also admire many of the constructivists you mention. [snip]
Wow, you sure get around, Kirby! :-)
By the way, in my post on sources, I forgot to mention Doug Engelbart,
of course. His mother of all demos is still driving much of computing
RD today (including, perhaps, a
On 6/5/06, Paul D. Fernhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even if you don't want to watch the entire 90 minutes, there is a textual
description there of what is presented.
Yes, Alan Kay circled that video at our summit meeting, Kim too. I
saw Guido take a peak at the Google version (as did I):
Andre Roberge wrote:
Indeed! This is really neat. I had downloaded a much earlier version
which left me rather underwhelmed (probably because I had no clue as to
what
patapata was leading to). This is really neat. Congrats Paul!
Thanks for the encouragement.
--Paul Fernhout
I know you know this, but just as an obligatory disclaimer, if PataPata is
any good, while I can (and will :-) certainly take some credit for yet
another attempt at putting constructivist educational ideas (and a
prototype-programming paradigm) into a Pythonic context, the vast bulk of
the
On 31/05/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Very nice demonstration; nice way to make it clear what PataPata is about!Thanks Doug I begin to gather all this on a single page (while testing googlepages in the same shot...):
http://francois.schnell.googlepages.com/patapata(The first
francois schnell wrote:
Thanks Doug I begin to gather all this on a single page (while testing
googlepages in the same shot...):
http://francois.schnell.googlepages.com/patapata
Wow! Beautiful page. Thanks for that and the two new videos.
I'm being mostly quiet because I am mostly coding(*).
kirby urner wrote:
I'm pleased you have become so enthusiastic about Paul's work.
I know you know this, but just as an obligatory disclaimer, if PataPata is
any good, while I can (and will :-) certainly take some credit for yet
another attempt at putting constructivist educational ideas (and a
Francois-
Well, then Python it is for as long as it works(*). :-) Thanks for the
feedback on that. [ (*)I know what I'm doing with __setattr_ and
_getattribute_ must almost certainly be reducing performance by at least a
10x order of magnitude, but so far I have not noticed... ]
And thanks
On 30/05/06, Paul D. Fernhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and later making documentation especially when the system settles down abit (including perhaps a movie of yours for SourceForge? Or even a mainpage?).I would be pleased to help with that, maybe one or two neat 5 minutes programs and also a
Very nice demonstration; nice way to make it clear what PataPata is about!
(The first thing I was wondering about was if there was a way to make a
dynamic change apply to all current objects? Say, change all of their
colors, or methods.)
Also, you can make your videos using your favorite tool,
Computer Science is a funny field, reached from both mathematics and
engineering, so the ideas you see there can come from either of these
sides (and cause lovely fights in faculty meetings).
Plus I'm this philo guy, stoked on Wittgenstein, coming to CS through
software engineering
On 29/05/06, Paul D. Fernhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Francois-Wow!Thanks for making that Flash recording: http://francois.schnell.free.fr/bazar/patapata-test1/patapata-test1.html
That is a neat demo showing things I had not even thought of, like withthe jumping Morphs (and far beyond my
On 5/29/06, francois schnell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29/05/06, Paul D. Fernhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Francois-
Wow! Thanks for making that Flash recording:
I echo my thanks. These kinds of video demos with audio are very useful.
I'm pleased you have become so enthusiastic
On 5/26/06, kirby urner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So you're saying Python is sufficiently accessible because we may still assume scientists and engineers are learning C++ and Java? The fact remains:many academics are throwing up their hands when encountering Python, because they can't make the
On 5/28/06, Andre Roberge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The first barrier I encountered was the dot notation. Nowhere did I see
it explain separately, as a notational convention, shared by many languages.
I thought it was something weird about Java that I would have to learn.
Solution:
At 22:23 26/05/2006, Ian Bicking wrote:
Not many scientists and engineers learn C or sh any more. ABC's
developers had the right idea.
Yes, but they learn C++ and Java and things like that.
You wish. As part of my project I did a brief survey of what physics
departments used to teach
At 22:13 29/05/2006, Bill Bradley wrote:
Good gravy?! Where did you look? When I got my Physics
degree we not only had to take programming, but we built 68K
breadboard computers, programmed them in assembly (with a hex
keypad) and used them to read and drive ADC/DACs to output on
On 26/05/06, Paul D. Fernhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think Self leads the way here in generality with one inspector that canbe used to build GUIs, programs, or just sets of objects. And here is anattempt to bring that ease of use to Python, building on ideas from Self
(and Squeak):
Andre Roberge wrote:
... Let me give a concrete example explaining inheritance for non-computer
scientists.
===
class Father(object): ...
class Mother(object): ...
class Child(Mother, Father): ...
===
The computer scientists in the (virtual) room are probably horrified.
Yup. I am
Given Python's original goal was to be friendly to techies who are not
specifically computer scientists, I'm finding it telling how few
physics majors get any exposure to the language, even today.
Even though it's used a lot on the job in many walks of life (per
success stories), I think we could
On 5/26/06, kirby urner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given Python's original goal was to be friendly to techies who are not
specifically computer scientists,
Actually, that was ABC's goal. Python's original goal was to be a
scripting language for people already fluent in C and sh.
--
--Guido van
kirby urner wrote:
Now they open a tutorial or book on such as Python, and immediately
feel lost. There's a lot of new jargon, and not many references to
languages they already know. Where is Python for Pascal
programmers?
As in my longer email previous, I think part of the answer is in
On 5/26/06, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5/26/06, kirby urner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given Python's original goal was to be friendly to techies who are not
specifically computer scientists,
Actually, that was ABC's goal. Python's original goal was to be a
scripting
kirby urner wrote:
Not many scientists and engineers learn C or sh any more. ABC's
developers had the right idea.
Yes, but they learn C++ and Java and things like that. It's all part of
the Algol family, and that family has maintained a strong hold on the
mainstream of language syntax.
24 matches
Mail list logo
