With C you have to teach a whole bunch of syntax structures that are in many ways completely orthogonal to computer programming. You have to teach operator precedence, code blocks, assignments and pointers which are not triavial. For a beginner it is best to give them less syntactic baggage and some them the concepts. Once they get the concepts down, you can show them how to express it any language.
I used to teach Java programming, and the best year I gad was when I took three weeks to teach them Scheme first, all the way up to object construction(basically a summary of SICP to chapter 3). Then we were able to go very quickly into Java with these concepts. The kids then got to see Java not as a black box but the principles that make it work.
In the old days they used to teach Latin before they taught English grammar for many of the same reasons. The investment in time and effort pays back large dividends in the future.
I suggest that you try teaching C to ninth graders, and see if they grasp right away such a concept as a pointer in an easy manner. A good teacher doesn't throw the kids into the deep water right away but lets them walk about in the shallow end for awhile.
If you need quick access to LISP libraries, check out Quicklisp . Well over 800 libraries available with just a (ql:quickload "library-name"). You can even do some quick syntactic sugar to do (import....) and you can have what Python has and even more.
If are other libraries that you need but are unavailable, might I suggest getting involved
The problem with Lisp libraries is not so much their lack, but the fact that they are not readily available. Some say that it is so easy to roll your own that Lisp discourages looking for a library. Plus it is sometimes fun to do it yourself, especially if you love Lisp. But their are lots of implementations that have extensive libraries, just like emacs has tons of extensions, the only downside is that there is not too much standardization (like emacs extensions).
For kids I would most recommend the Racket IDE. It has a window like other programs and buttons and even has a few games. For the smart kids though, I would give them Emacs and show them how the editor is written in the same language that they are using (Emacs has SLIME as well as GEISER that integrates well with Racket or Guile), and they really take off with that. Sometimes the kids spend hours just exploring of the Emacs operating system and all the different modes (and games).
I have tried VIM, especially for a C language class, and it does work too. Vim is a very powerful editor for compiled languages. But for LISP/Scheme Emacs is definitely superior. In Emacs you can even go Evil and teach them both.
public class CalculateCircleAreaExample {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int radius = 0;
System.out.println("Please enter radius of a circle");
try
{
BufferedReader br = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(System.in));
radius = Integer.parseInt(br.readLine());
}
catch(NumberFormatException ne)
{
System.out.println("Invalid radius value" + ne);
System.exit(0);
}
catch(IOException ioe)
{
System.out.println("IO Error:" + ioe);
System.exit(0);
}
double area = Math.PI * radius * radius;
System.out.println("Area of a circle is " + area);
} }
To be honest, that will completely turn him off to programming. You have to teach so many things about syntax, exceptions, objects and imports that you can't even print something out without at least 6 hours of lessons. Never mind telling them how to compile something like that. Kids need to play with the computer, to see results right away, and Scheme lets them do this right away. Java, C and the rest of the compiled languages are just too steep a learning curve to give the average 9th grader. Give them Scheme first, the rest will be easier.
Much more readable than anything written in Java or C or even Python. Put a kid in front of a Python interpreter and he will wonder why none of his loops will work. The beauty of Scheme is that the first element in the list is always a function. I even teach kids to do (quote x) before giving them the shortcuts.
Also, most Scheme IDE's will indent the code automatically so readability has never been a problem.
A ninth grader already knows how to use Microsoft Word. Any kid picks up that without any problems, and it would simply be a waste of time to teach Word in schools. The same with most other generic software programs.
If you are going to teach the kids computer science, that is to say, how to program, there is nothing better than Scheme in my opinion. I've tried teaching in Python and Java, but to be honest kids need the minimal syntax possible, and Scheme really is great for teaching the science of computer programming.
Perhaps you are not old enough to remember the times when farmers themselves poured milk in the street in the vain effort to raise prices. For a history lesson, perhaps start here :
The dairy industry is not simply a supply and demand equation. Any sane economic policy doesn't just rely on market pressures. Market pressures of themselves lead to the destruction of smaller businesses and the general liquidation of the middle class, by the simple fact that he who possesses more capital can remove the competition from the market by simply buying them out. For instance, in Poland recently Carlsburg bought several native breweries and immediately shut them down in order to control the market. The customers have no choice now to buy any other beer but theirs. With the consolidation of the different brands there is likewise a consolidation of production methods and in general the diversity of the market is impoverished. This is capitalism, where the small business simply has no ability to compete especially with the reality of debt and financing of capital are as they are today.
By the fact that corporate mergers have not been regulated by the government, we have the absurd situation that certain businesses are now "to big to fail", and instead of the government governing the economy the economy is governed by businesses.
To try to solve modern problems by returning to the economics of the 19th century is simply insane. What is more, the economic theories of the 19th century never worked very well to begin with - depressions were so dramatic and cyclical that people actually died of hunger. Thanks to several intelligent people who actually thought that government ought to try to regulate these things, people in the US and Europe in large measure haven't experienced hunger for the past 60 years. If you want a free market, might I suggest going to Somalia or any third world country lives according to the principles of least government. You won't get taxed, but you won't be making much money either.
Just a question : do videos uploaded to youtube keep their gps information? It would seem that this already facilitates the process. With facebook even more correlations can be done.
For the convicted sex offenders there is already a database for that. We are not far from your scenario already.
Ad 2/ Well, if it is as you said that the Government exists to defend the Constitution, maybe they should look at Article 1, section 8, that is to say:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; a/ To borrow money on the credit of the United States; b/ To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes; c/ To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States; d/ To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures; e/ To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
That is to say, according to the Constitution the Government ought to regulate the means of exchange of goods within its jurisdiction. If the Government can't do this, it isn't governing.
ad 4/ Your objection actually is self-contradictory: debasing is a manner of regulating the worth of something. By definition if you debase something you lower its value. The inverse can be done by regulating the cost of capital or reducing the amount in circulation.
ad 5/ The government regulates the price of milk via marketing order regulations. If this were not done, no dairy farmer could afford to keep their cows. Yet because the government intervenes by fixing a minimum price for milk, many famers can sell their products in the market and still make a living. Not all price fixing results in a black market, and most price fixing is done because there is actually too much of a product on a market, or because it is deemed as something necessary for society.
ad 7/ What do you mean by the phrase: " especially if that country's currency is counted to be 'reserve'". This sentence simply doesn't parse.
ad 8/ A small government does not necessarily imply a better working government. It might not even be cheaper. There is more to government than just its size.
ad 9/ Certainly, but if the dollar no longer buys something in your local store it is usually because there is no one guaranteeing the value of the currency. In Somalia many places don't take their currency, but will gladly take dollars because at least a dollar can get you something. Money has value in as much as there is a government assuring its value.
ad 10/ I'll see your disdain and raise you a self-contradiction.
The analogy is interesting, but it fails in one crucial aspect. A family doesn't really own the money that they spend - their resources are necessarily limited as they do not own the source of the means of exchange (namely the money). If a family was to operate like the government does, it wouldn't last very long.
However, by definition, a government is there to regulate the means of exchange, and thus is not limited to a budget in the same sense as a family is. The government can print money for instance, or regulate its worth by modifying the exchange rate with other economies, or even mandating fixed pricing on certain goods like gasoline. The government doesn't pay bills in the same way that a family does. So the question of a budget is not applicable in the same sense as for a family.
So it might be an interesting analogy, but fails at the most crucial point - a government is responsible for the value of the currency, a family merely uses the currency of the government.
I'd rather hack up something the FL/OSS community actually needs. The problem is — how to figure out what it could be?"
Well, there we go, you already have a problem that needs fixing! So how about this:
A database that keeps track of FL/OSS community needs. Some possible features:
1/ People go to your website/program and input their software needs. Could be a form with relative requirements on each need. You put the requirements and users in a database, with some sort of relationship between user and need. 2/ People with projects can put their project in the database by stating its goals, as well as state of completion. The state of completion implies (negatively) what requirements still need to be fulfilled for each project. 3/ Your fancy program tries by some algorithm to match 1+2, using some sort of database. Your program brings people's needs and the projects needs together in some form that allows the needs to be fulfilled. Bonus points for making it some sort of social site. Your software is not only open source, but even "community driven".
Actually your question points out a need - how about fulfilling that need? You have already tried to find something that would help you, but couldn't find it - how about doing something about it? This is the best way to do software - not by taking an arbitrary list of stuff from others, but actually experiencing the need yourself. Since you know the requirements in some degree, you should put your energies in fulfilling them. Would make an interesting and useful project.
Viper mode is good, but it is at times confusing, especially when you confuse it with too many Escapes. Evil has quite a few more features too. Both are good projects, though I think Evil has progressed more.
By the way, not to belittle the project in any way, but you can already run vim inside of EMACS by the following:
M - x (return) term (choose shell) ; vim
You get the whole vim in an emacs term buffer. What you don't get is any real integration (you are stuck in vim, but your mouse can get you to another buffer if you need to). Evil is much better in that you are still in emacs while you use vim shortcuts and commands and you can get into emacs easier for slime and the rest.
You can even launch screen inside a term buffer - very handy for a quick ssh to a development machine (screen -R). You can even launch emacs on the other machine inside the term buffer for recursive madness.
EMACS is just awesome. And now thanks to Evil it also has an awesome editor.
For a CNC machine, you probably want more of a 3D modeling system, namely something more on the lines of BRL-CAD. There is lot of documentation out there for BRL-CAD as it's been around for awhile. FreeCAD is more for drawings, but still a good program.
I do believe some people are working on that, but actually with the speed of today's machines you can compile most documents (even fairly large documents) in about 1-2 seconds tops, of course depending on your machine. On my notebook it is almost instantaneous for documents of 10 pages in length. Thus you can just put a view buffer (xdvi window) on auto refresh and have autosave set to 10 seconds with a compile hook and you get very good results, but with a lag that you might not find acceptable.
It might be good to ask the developers of the site to see what they do - they must have some sort of compiler tricks to handle all those concurrent demands.
But to be honest I like LaTeX and TeX exactly for the reason that it doesn't render the document all at once. To me, writing is a bit like composing music - you work away at the different sections, working from sentence to sentence, paragraph by paragraph as the thoughts flow according to their inner harmony, and only afterwards do you get the orchestra together to hear what it sounds like. In my opinion writing is more of an intellectual art rather than a visual one. Writing a paper or even a letter is a lot like programming and TeX appeals to this style of working by putting the structure around the text and actually 'compiling' the document for others to use. It is first put in your mind clearly and only after compiling is it for others, much like a composer writes his music down before anyone hears it. Some people like to see what they are doing, and for them programs like InDesign are better, as they can move the text around and see how it looks. InDesign is more for painters than composers.
Pick your tools according to your tastes. I don't think LaTeX ever had the ambition to be for the masses, only to be effective at what it does. The instant preview does have advantages, there is no doubt about that.
Actually AutoCAD has an integrated lisp interpreter, so you could load Visual Lisp files and edit the source and see the output. There might be other programs like this elsewhere, but I know AutoCad let's you do this. There are lots of Visual Lisp files on the net.
You could also use emacs to do some drawing in SVG format, rendering it using the Emacs SVG mode. You could also write it all in elisp and use an s-expression to xml conversion script in an auto-revert buffer. Whether you would want to do that is of course a wholly different matter.
Slashdot Mirror
With C you have to teach a whole bunch of syntax structures that are in many ways completely orthogonal to computer programming. You have to teach operator precedence, code blocks, assignments and pointers which are not triavial. For a beginner it is best to give them less syntactic baggage and some them the concepts. Once they get the concepts down, you can show them how to express it any language.
I used to teach Java programming, and the best year I gad was when I took three weeks to teach them Scheme first, all the way up to object construction(basically a summary of SICP to chapter 3). Then we were able to go very quickly into Java with these concepts. The kids then got to see Java not as a black box but the principles that make it work.
In the old days they used to teach Latin before they taught English grammar for many of the same reasons. The investment in time and effort pays back large dividends in the future.
I suggest that you try teaching C to ninth graders, and see if they grasp right away such a concept as a pointer in an easy manner. A good teacher doesn't throw the kids into the deep water right away but lets them walk about in the shallow end for awhile.
If you need quick access to LISP libraries, check out Quicklisp . Well over 800 libraries available with just a (ql:quickload "library-name"). You can even do some quick syntactic sugar to do (import ....) and you can have what Python has and even more.
If are other libraries that you need but are unavailable, might I suggest getting involved
The problem with Lisp libraries is not so much their lack, but the fact that they are not readily available. Some say that it is so easy to roll your own that Lisp discourages looking for a library. Plus it is sometimes fun to do it yourself, especially if you love Lisp. But their are lots of implementations that have extensive libraries, just like emacs has tons of extensions, the only downside is that there is not too much standardization (like emacs extensions).
Actually your example won't even compile. Your kid will type that in and nothing will happen as you will get a syntax error.
The Scheme example has already defined a function that is understandable and immediately usable.
For kids I would most recommend the Racket IDE. It has a window like other programs and buttons and even has a few games. For the smart kids though, I would give them Emacs and show them how the editor is written in the same language that they are using (Emacs has SLIME as well as GEISER that integrates well with Racket or Guile), and they really take off with that. Sometimes the kids spend hours just exploring of the Emacs operating system and all the different modes (and games).
I have tried VIM, especially for a C language class, and it does work too. Vim is a very powerful editor for compiled languages. But for LISP/Scheme Emacs is definitely superior. In Emacs you can even go Evil and teach them both.
Ok, well let's try that in Java :
import java.io.BufferedReader;
import java.io.IOException;
import java.io.InputStreamReader;
public class CalculateCircleAreaExample { :" + ioe);
public static void main(String[] args) {
int radius = 0;
System.out.println("Please enter radius of a circle");
try
{
BufferedReader br = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(System.in));
radius = Integer.parseInt(br.readLine());
}
catch(NumberFormatException ne)
{
System.out.println("Invalid radius value" + ne);
System.exit(0);
}
catch(IOException ioe)
{
System.out.println("IO Error
System.exit(0);
}
double area = Math.PI * radius * radius;
System.out.println("Area of a circle is " + area);
}
}
To be honest, that will completely turn him off to programming. You have to teach so many things about syntax, exceptions, objects and imports that you can't even print something out without at least 6 hours of lessons. Never mind telling them how to compile something like that. Kids need to play with the computer, to see results right away, and Scheme lets them do this right away. Java, C and the rest of the compiled languages are just too steep a learning curve to give the average 9th grader. Give them Scheme first, the rest will be easier.
Much more readable than anything written in Java or C or even Python. Put a kid in front of a Python interpreter and he will wonder why none of his loops will work. The beauty of Scheme is that the first element in the list is always a function. I even teach kids to do (quote x) before giving them the shortcuts.
Also, most Scheme IDE's will indent the code automatically so readability has never been a problem.
A ninth grader already knows how to use Microsoft Word. Any kid picks up that without any problems, and it would simply be a waste of time to teach Word in schools. The same with most other generic software programs.
If you are going to teach the kids computer science, that is to say, how to program, there is nothing better than Scheme in my opinion. I've tried teaching in Python and Java, but to be honest kids need the minimal syntax possible, and Scheme really is great for teaching the science of computer programming.
Using Perl and cussing go so often together that they are pretty much synonymous.
Perhaps you are not old enough to remember the times when farmers themselves poured milk in the street in the vain effort to raise prices. For a history lesson, perhaps start here :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1933_Wisconsin_milk_strike
For more information on the history of the dairy industry, I recommend this: http://pdic.tamu.edu/black/stillman.pdf
The dairy industry is not simply a supply and demand equation. Any sane economic policy doesn't just rely on market pressures. Market pressures of themselves lead to the destruction of smaller businesses and the general liquidation of the middle class, by the simple fact that he who possesses more capital can remove the competition from the market by simply buying them out. For instance, in Poland recently Carlsburg bought several native breweries and immediately shut them down in order to control the market. The customers have no choice now to buy any other beer but theirs. With the consolidation of the different brands there is likewise a consolidation of production methods and in general the diversity of the market is impoverished. This is capitalism, where the small business simply has no ability to compete especially with the reality of debt and financing of capital are as they are today.
By the fact that corporate mergers have not been regulated by the government, we have the absurd situation that certain businesses are now "to big to fail", and instead of the government governing the economy the economy is governed by businesses.
To try to solve modern problems by returning to the economics of the 19th century is simply insane. What is more, the economic theories of the 19th century never worked very well to begin with - depressions were so dramatic and cyclical that people actually died of hunger. Thanks to several intelligent people who actually thought that government ought to try to regulate these things, people in the US and Europe in large measure haven't experienced hunger for the past 60 years. If you want a free market, might I suggest going to Somalia or any third world country lives according to the principles of least government. You won't get taxed, but you won't be making much money either.
And the New York times reporter needs to sell papers to get advertisers, and has been known for his connections with the oil industry.
I think the answer you are looking for is: None of the above.
Just a question : do videos uploaded to youtube keep their gps information? It would seem that this already facilitates the process. With facebook even more correlations can be done.
For the convicted sex offenders there is already a database for that. We are not far from your scenario already.
Ad 1/ I don't think I was disputing that.
Ad 2/ Well, if it is as you said that the Government exists to defend the Constitution, maybe they should look at Article 1, section 8, that is to say:
That is to say, according to the Constitution the Government ought to regulate the means of exchange of goods within its jurisdiction. If the Government can't do this, it isn't governing.
ad 4/ Your objection actually is self-contradictory: debasing is a manner of regulating the worth of something. By definition if you debase something you lower its value. The inverse can be done by regulating the cost of capital or reducing the amount in circulation.
ad 5/ The government regulates the price of milk via marketing order regulations. If this were not done, no dairy farmer could afford to keep their cows. Yet because the government intervenes by fixing a minimum price for milk, many famers can sell their products in the market and still make a living. Not all price fixing results in a black market, and most price fixing is done because there is actually too much of a product on a market, or because it is deemed as something necessary for society.
ad 7/ What do you mean by the phrase: " especially if that country's currency is counted to be 'reserve'". This sentence simply doesn't parse.
ad 8/ A small government does not necessarily imply a better working government. It might not even be cheaper. There is more to government than just its size.
ad 9/ Certainly, but if the dollar no longer buys something in your local store it is usually because there is no one guaranteeing the value of the currency. In Somalia many places don't take their currency, but will gladly take dollars because at least a dollar can get you something. Money has value in as much as there is a government assuring its value.
ad 10/ I'll see your disdain and raise you a self-contradiction.
The analogy is interesting, but it fails in one crucial aspect. A family doesn't really own the money that they spend - their resources are necessarily limited as they do not own the source of the means of exchange (namely the money). If a family was to operate like the government does, it wouldn't last very long.
However, by definition, a government is there to regulate the means of exchange, and thus is not limited to a budget in the same sense as a family is. The government can print money for instance, or regulate its worth by modifying the exchange rate with other economies, or even mandating fixed pricing on certain goods like gasoline. The government doesn't pay bills in the same way that a family does. So the question of a budget is not applicable in the same sense as for a family.
So it might be an interesting analogy, but fails at the most crucial point - a government is responsible for the value of the currency, a family merely uses the currency of the government.
From the submitter:
Well, there we go, you already have a problem that needs fixing! So how about this:
A database that keeps track of FL/OSS community needs. Some possible features:
1/ People go to your website/program and input their software needs. Could be a form with relative requirements on each need. You put the requirements and users in a database, with some sort of relationship between user and need.
2/ People with projects can put their project in the database by stating its goals, as well as state of completion. The state of completion implies (negatively) what requirements still need to be fulfilled for each project.
3/ Your fancy program tries by some algorithm to match 1+2, using some sort of database. Your program brings people's needs and the projects needs together in some form that allows the needs to be fulfilled. Bonus points for making it some sort of social site. Your software is not only open source, but even "community driven".
Actually your question points out a need - how about fulfilling that need? You have already tried to find something that would help you, but couldn't find it - how about doing something about it? This is the best way to do software - not by taking an arbitrary list of stuff from others, but actually experiencing the need yourself. Since you know the requirements in some degree, you should put your energies in fulfilling them. Would make an interesting and useful project.
Good luck with whatever you decide to do.
Try this for your amusement:
Launch emacs.
Step 1: M-x term ; screen vim :!emacs
Step 2: in vim type
Step 3: return to step 1
You can stack as many sessions as you want. Why you would want to do that is of course completely your affair.
Try this in Vim:
(ESC) : !emacs %e
Edit your file in emacs and then return to vim (just load file "L").
Your welcome.
Viper mode is good, but it is at times confusing, especially when you confuse it with too many Escapes. Evil has quite a few more features too. Both are good projects, though I think Evil has progressed more.
By the way, not to belittle the project in any way, but you can already run vim inside of EMACS by the following:
M - x (return) term (choose shell) ; vim
You get the whole vim in an emacs term buffer. What you don't get is any real integration (you are stuck in vim, but your mouse can get you to another buffer if you need to). Evil is much better in that you are still in emacs while you use vim shortcuts and commands and you can get into emacs easier for slime and the rest.
You can even launch screen inside a term buffer - very handy for a quick ssh to a development machine (screen -R). You can even launch emacs on the other machine inside the term buffer for recursive madness.
EMACS is just awesome. And now thanks to Evil it also has an awesome editor.
It's already been done, several times in fact .
For SVG, you can use Sketsa (not free unfortunately), or for just minor stuff in a browser window: svg-edit.
For a CNC machine, you probably want more of a 3D modeling system, namely something more on the lines of BRL-CAD. There is lot of documentation out there for BRL-CAD as it's been around for awhile. FreeCAD is more for drawings, but still a good program.
I do believe some people are working on that, but actually with the speed of today's machines you can compile most documents (even fairly large documents) in about 1-2 seconds tops, of course depending on your machine. On my notebook it is almost instantaneous for documents of 10 pages in length. Thus you can just put a view buffer (xdvi window) on auto refresh and have autosave set to 10 seconds with a compile hook and you get very good results, but with a lag that you might not find acceptable.
It might be good to ask the developers of the site to see what they do - they must have some sort of compiler tricks to handle all those concurrent demands.
But to be honest I like LaTeX and TeX exactly for the reason that it doesn't render the document all at once. To me, writing is a bit like composing music - you work away at the different sections, working from sentence to sentence, paragraph by paragraph as the thoughts flow according to their inner harmony, and only afterwards do you get the orchestra together to hear what it sounds like. In my opinion writing is more of an intellectual art rather than a visual one. Writing a paper or even a letter is a lot like programming and TeX appeals to this style of working by putting the structure around the text and actually 'compiling' the document for others to use. It is first put in your mind clearly and only after compiling is it for others, much like a composer writes his music down before anyone hears it. Some people like to see what they are doing, and for them programs like InDesign are better, as they can move the text around and see how it looks. InDesign is more for painters than composers.
Pick your tools according to your tastes. I don't think LaTeX ever had the ambition to be for the masses, only to be effective at what it does. The instant preview does have advantages, there is no doubt about that.
What you describe you can do in Emacs with AUCTeX. I believe JEdit has something similar.
If you don't like LaTeX, take a look at scribble :
http://docs.racket-lang.org/scribble/getting-started.html
Actually AutoCAD has an integrated lisp interpreter, so you could load Visual Lisp files and edit the source and see the output. There might be other programs like this elsewhere, but I know AutoCad let's you do this. There are lots of Visual Lisp files on the net.
You could also use emacs to do some drawing in SVG format, rendering it using the Emacs SVG mode. You could also write it all in elisp and use an s-expression to xml conversion script in an auto-revert buffer. Whether you would want to do that is of course a wholly different matter.