I still have enough of the old procedural mindset in me to avoid setters, getters, mutators and accessors all at once! What is even better is that/.'s apparently recently implemented spelling/grammar check doesn't like mutator or accessor. +1 for the sane people I suppose? I don't write code to be rolled out into a large package to be reused by someone else elsewhere in an obtuse and poorly implemented fashion. I will set my variables to what I want, how I want, when I want.
Oddly enough my desire for developing a new language is not rooted in my scientific interests, but rather just an ease of use interest. Hell, ultimately my ideal language would be one you could just speak into a microphone as if it were your native verbal language and be understand and compile. (I realize there is quite a bit of complication with something like that, verbal language is so logically inconsistent). Essentially I want to be able to execute pseudocode. I want programming to be a natural extension of verbal language (or at least the language of Math). I don't want to have to worry about close parens, semi-colons, invoking some random ass class just because it's required to implement another random ass class I need, with it's own special syntax and parameters that are mandatory but unused.
Matlab I've just started digging into as it seems to be the best for what I'm trying to accomplish academically at the moment. Just wish I had more time. I envy those who can afford to attend school full-time;)
You can still buy PC's with Windows 7 installed by default and Win8 and optional upgrade. Granted anecdotal is anecdotal, but I just got a new laptop last week with Win7 installed on it. Custom built at that.
I really think that devs have started to embrace the PC market again and not necessarily due to the lengthy console life cycle (though I could be sorely mistaken on this). Most PC games I've bought over the past few years have been insanely moddable, customizable, and scaled very well across multiple configurations. Borderlands can be made playable on my i3 laptop with Intel integrated graphics at the lowest detail and resolution settings, and scaled up to run in max detail on my tower. Borderlands 2 is much the same, though it wont run at max on my tower, but will on my new gaming laptop (tower is 5 years old). Even the majority of the games I've bought over the last 5 years have had to be scaled DOWN to match the console experience. Though the jump up in quality isn't nearly as noticeable anymore. Quake 2 in software vs. Quake 2 in OpenGL was a huge, massive fucking difference. Bioshock Infinite in DX11 max settings vs. Bioshock Inifite console is only a minor difference that you have to be looking for to notice.
Many PC games these days scale fairly well, even if they are cross platform. My 5 year old tower will run anything on the market at console quality, yet for most of those games that isn't even close to max settings. The developers still push the envelope on that stuff, it's just that it isn't as noticeable anymore.
I doubt Win8 is the sole cause for the decline in PC sales. Quite a few manufacturers still offer Win7 by default (I just bought a brand new custom built Laptop, Win8 was an optional upgrade). I think it has to do more with the fact that hardware really is outpacing software these days and the only reason I even bought a new laptop was to play games when I travel. My old one works just fine still for the purpose I bought it for and my older ones are still quite usable and are now dedicated Linux machines.
The upgrade every 6 months or die cycle has long been toast.
Indeed. About the only place you will find Windows in the government is for standard office machines, where the expectation is that is what the user is familiar with. Everything else (serious business) is some variant of Unix (for older systems) or Linux.
Actually I think the key is just "when it interests them".
I mean we can apply classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and other methods all day long. Providing the material in a way that engages, interests and challenges an individual is always best, but the method for doing that may vary from individual to individual.
Yes, hence me despising Apple in their current state (pretty much since Jobs came back, though they had been rocky for a few years before that). I will however give credit where credit is due. Many icons in the code world got their start on an Apple machine. Many of them still have a lot of sentiment for the platform, why try to completely marginalize an entire group? Especially when some of the younger ones may not know any better?
At the elementary level I don't think the choice of language with reference to the business environment is that important. Teaching kids that they can make their computer/tablet/whatever DO STUFF and presenting it in an easy to digest format is much more valuable that what is big in the industry now. Keep in mind, elementary age... at least 20 years (on average) until they start rolling to the job market. Not all of them will be programmers. The languages we use now may be dying by that point. they may not all be programmers, some may be scientists using more focused languages in the vein of Matlab, some may be homemakers, some may be athletes, some may be artists. But they will all have an appreciation for technology and what it can do. They will all get introduced to logic and algorithmic structure at a much earlier age than is normal right now. Those things easily apply to other aspects of life. Hell, if they keep at programming strictly on a hobby basis, they may even catch on to when the developers at their company/organization/whatever are BS'ing them about what can and cannot be accomplished.
As a Math major I totally get that. Especially at the more advanced level where you start using perpendicular, orthogonal and normal pretty much interchangeably. In programming, I've used "procedure", "subroutine", "function" and "method" to describe what is conceptually the same thing. I like function best because of the easy tie in with Math, granted given the mathematic definition of a function, I can see where a function with no return value seems bizarre.
As far as encapsulation goes, while I get that there wasn't a term in programming prior to the concept being introduced, it just feels buzzwordy and elitist. Object at least makes sense, so does class. Constructor? Sure, I'll buy it. But encapsulation just feels intentionally obtuse, I'll totally blame that on your marketing conspiracy theory.
I've at times considered delving more into CS with the goal of developing my own high level language, but my interest in CS really is only an extension of my interest in Mathematics and Physics and the desire to use computational resources to support applications of both. I'm also afraid that while my goals in developing said language might be noble, that I would easily get distracted and end up developing something just as obtuse if not more so. I certainly have a lot of respect for the difficulty of the task.
While I agree with your sentiment about "why use Java" for something like this, I also really applaud this kind of thing. Yeah, different language or language invented specifically for this app probably would have been better, but introducing kids to programming at an early age is win over all.
Oh trust me, I get that about C#, it's just that much of a step up above Java (and both have roots in C, so the transition was fairly easy). Granted I'm old enough to where when I started programming OOP hadn't even become a fad yet (to be fair, I started at a much earlier age than most of my peers - PC's weren't common in the home at the time - mid 80's). Though I still tend to think procedurally, I like the concepts of OOP, just hate that evangelism and the needless jargon introduced to separate it from everything that came before it. Methods? Really? Did we honestly need to introduce a new word for what is essentially a function? Encapsulation? Ok, now we are just moving into intellectual elitism.
I like your Victorian comparison. I find it rather fitting.
No, but it might not hurt to try and find a way to introduce those concepts earlier? The same goes for programming, logic is a segment of mathematics that is essential to programming yet doesn't require concepts such as addition and its offshoots (almost every other operation commonly used in Math). Boolean and Binary logic are the foundation of programming and are simple enough that a 5 year old can grasp them. Sure, they may not be able to design complex circuits at that age (though you might get the occasional child who will wow you) but they could most certainly understand the concept and apply it at a basic level.
As much as I fucking despise Apple (aside from my iPod classic), you do realize that a good portion of hacker culture spawned around the Apple and Macintosh computers right?
I really think algorithm structure and design (from a math perspective) is more important for a beginning coder than things like OOP and memory management, yes those are important, especially with how prevalent OOP has become, however OOP is just a wrapper around the math and the memory management will flow from sound and logical structures. Pseudocode is probably the best first step, aside from it lacking the ability to be executed.
Indeed. Seriously fuck java. I decided to try to learn Java after quite a few years of not coding (not that I ever got that advanced with it anyway). There are not enough derogatory words in all languages combined to describe my hatred of Java. It seems simple and straightforward at first, but this is deception! (To be fair, some of my issue is with the buzzword like jargon associated with it and OOP in general, fucking insanity). Sure, basic math to advanced math (which is generally what I use code for being a current Math major) isn't that bad, and not really any different from C or even BASIC. But anything you want to do beyond that is a fucking nightmare. Want to poll the mouse? keyboard? draw to the screen? Simple, straightforward tasks, here's the proper syntax, the relevant objects, blah blah blah. Oh wait, it doesn't work? Did you remember to do this? oh you did, oh in that case you weren't supposed to, still doesn't work? hrmmm.....
I'm sure there probably is an underlying logic to it, I'm sure a more experienced Java vet could easily tell me what was wrong with it, but you know, documentation and maybe a reference book or two should be all anyone needs to get through a new language. Maybe I'll just stick with pseudocode and be happy. I've actually been digging C# lately because it makes that stuff EASY. It's simple, it's straightforward, there aren't as many bizarre syntax quirks.
But yeah, easy to understand languages that capture the general concept of algorithm construction are best for intro programming, drop the syntax and buzzword nonsense and just focus on structure. Hell even just sticking with pseudocode for a beginner might not be bad (though, they wouldn't be able to run a program and see a result, so no feedback).
I would think any language that's fairly simple and can produce instant results would be a good language to introduce a child to. I say this because I had BASIC at the age of 5 and I could type out a few lines of code, hit run and see the results (almost) instantly. Better yet was having a ton of software written in BASIC that I could load up, tinker with and then try. I'm not really in touch with most modern languages, so I don't know what's out there that would have that same kind of feel, but I know that as a kid it was awesome for me (granted everyone is different, but hey).
There have been games that have done this before, even well before "The Diamond Age" was an idea in Stephenson's head. The problem is these kinds of games are so few and far between that it's fairly notable when one comes up.
While I certainly played my fair share of standard games as a kid, I also had quite a few educational ones as well (granted some of them were below me, my parents bought me a math game based on my age and not my ability). As much as I hate coding now (mostly due to syntax crap in languages like Java), I love the logic behind it and the games I had that involved various forms of programming to solve problems were always a lot of fun.
One of the best things I ever had as a kid was a TRS-80 (CoCo - and not a true TRS-80 either, even though that was stamped on it) that booted to a BASIC interpreter. The code for any games I loaded directly off disk could be tinkered with easily, no need to compile. This was awesome as a curious 5 year old.
Even better about it were the games "Rocky's Boots" and "Robot Odyssey". These games taught me the basics of digital electronics, lessons which have actually helped in my current career as a technician (with no formal training in digital logic). Seeing this kind of software being produced in a modern setting is awesome, I wish there was more of it.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed, Thank you for the quality discussion! I will now go investigate the mystery that is sleep.
I still have enough of the old procedural mindset in me to avoid setters, getters, mutators and accessors all at once! What is even better is that /.'s apparently recently implemented spelling/grammar check doesn't like mutator or accessor. +1 for the sane people I suppose? I don't write code to be rolled out into a large package to be reused by someone else elsewhere in an obtuse and poorly implemented fashion. I will set my variables to what I want, how I want, when I want.
Oddly enough my desire for developing a new language is not rooted in my scientific interests, but rather just an ease of use interest. Hell, ultimately my ideal language would be one you could just speak into a microphone as if it were your native verbal language and be understand and compile. (I realize there is quite a bit of complication with something like that, verbal language is so logically inconsistent). Essentially I want to be able to execute pseudocode. I want programming to be a natural extension of verbal language (or at least the language of Math). I don't want to have to worry about close parens, semi-colons, invoking some random ass class just because it's required to implement another random ass class I need, with it's own special syntax and parameters that are mandatory but unused.
Matlab I've just started digging into as it seems to be the best for what I'm trying to accomplish academically at the moment. Just wish I had more time. I envy those who can afford to attend school full-time ;)
You can still buy PC's with Windows 7 installed by default and Win8 and optional upgrade. Granted anecdotal is anecdotal, but I just got a new laptop last week with Win7 installed on it. Custom built at that.
Amen. Praise the Lard.
I really think that devs have started to embrace the PC market again and not necessarily due to the lengthy console life cycle (though I could be sorely mistaken on this). Most PC games I've bought over the past few years have been insanely moddable, customizable, and scaled very well across multiple configurations. Borderlands can be made playable on my i3 laptop with Intel integrated graphics at the lowest detail and resolution settings, and scaled up to run in max detail on my tower. Borderlands 2 is much the same, though it wont run at max on my tower, but will on my new gaming laptop (tower is 5 years old). Even the majority of the games I've bought over the last 5 years have had to be scaled DOWN to match the console experience. Though the jump up in quality isn't nearly as noticeable anymore. Quake 2 in software vs. Quake 2 in OpenGL was a huge, massive fucking difference. Bioshock Infinite in DX11 max settings vs. Bioshock Inifite console is only a minor difference that you have to be looking for to notice.
One of my favorite quotes, and it probably came from a user comment on Slashdot somewhere:
"Apple isn't a technology company that makes fashionable products, they are a fashion company that makes technology products".
Probably not verbatim, but yeah the meat is there.
Many PC games these days scale fairly well, even if they are cross platform. My 5 year old tower will run anything on the market at console quality, yet for most of those games that isn't even close to max settings. The developers still push the envelope on that stuff, it's just that it isn't as noticeable anymore.
I doubt Win8 is the sole cause for the decline in PC sales. Quite a few manufacturers still offer Win7 by default (I just bought a brand new custom built Laptop, Win8 was an optional upgrade). I think it has to do more with the fact that hardware really is outpacing software these days and the only reason I even bought a new laptop was to play games when I travel. My old one works just fine still for the purpose I bought it for and my older ones are still quite usable and are now dedicated Linux machines.
The upgrade every 6 months or die cycle has long been toast.
Indeed. About the only place you will find Windows in the government is for standard office machines, where the expectation is that is what the user is familiar with. Everything else (serious business) is some variant of Unix (for older systems) or Linux.
Actually I think the key is just "when it interests them".
I mean we can apply classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and other methods all day long. Providing the material in a way that engages, interests and challenges an individual is always best, but the method for doing that may vary from individual to individual.
Yes, hence me despising Apple in their current state (pretty much since Jobs came back, though they had been rocky for a few years before that). I will however give credit where credit is due. Many icons in the code world got their start on an Apple machine. Many of them still have a lot of sentiment for the platform, why try to completely marginalize an entire group? Especially when some of the younger ones may not know any better?
I need to lay off the alcohol tonight. I just realized I responded to two of your posts in the exact same fashion. /sigh
At the elementary level I don't think the choice of language with reference to the business environment is that important. Teaching kids that they can make their computer/tablet/whatever DO STUFF and presenting it in an easy to digest format is much more valuable that what is big in the industry now. Keep in mind, elementary age... at least 20 years (on average) until they start rolling to the job market. Not all of them will be programmers. The languages we use now may be dying by that point. they may not all be programmers, some may be scientists using more focused languages in the vein of Matlab, some may be homemakers, some may be athletes, some may be artists. But they will all have an appreciation for technology and what it can do. They will all get introduced to logic and algorithmic structure at a much earlier age than is normal right now. Those things easily apply to other aspects of life. Hell, if they keep at programming strictly on a hobby basis, they may even catch on to when the developers at their company/organization/whatever are BS'ing them about what can and cannot be accomplished.
As a Math major I totally get that. Especially at the more advanced level where you start using perpendicular, orthogonal and normal pretty much interchangeably. In programming, I've used "procedure", "subroutine", "function" and "method" to describe what is conceptually the same thing. I like function best because of the easy tie in with Math, granted given the mathematic definition of a function, I can see where a function with no return value seems bizarre.
As far as encapsulation goes, while I get that there wasn't a term in programming prior to the concept being introduced, it just feels buzzwordy and elitist. Object at least makes sense, so does class. Constructor? Sure, I'll buy it. But encapsulation just feels intentionally obtuse, I'll totally blame that on your marketing conspiracy theory.
I've at times considered delving more into CS with the goal of developing my own high level language, but my interest in CS really is only an extension of my interest in Mathematics and Physics and the desire to use computational resources to support applications of both. I'm also afraid that while my goals in developing said language might be noble, that I would easily get distracted and end up developing something just as obtuse if not more so. I certainly have a lot of respect for the difficulty of the task.
While I agree with your sentiment about "why use Java" for something like this, I also really applaud this kind of thing. Yeah, different language or language invented specifically for this app probably would have been better, but introducing kids to programming at an early age is win over all.
Oh trust me, I get that about C#, it's just that much of a step up above Java (and both have roots in C, so the transition was fairly easy). Granted I'm old enough to where when I started programming OOP hadn't even become a fad yet (to be fair, I started at a much earlier age than most of my peers - PC's weren't common in the home at the time - mid 80's). Though I still tend to think procedurally, I like the concepts of OOP, just hate that evangelism and the needless jargon introduced to separate it from everything that came before it. Methods? Really? Did we honestly need to introduce a new word for what is essentially a function? Encapsulation? Ok, now we are just moving into intellectual elitism.
I like your Victorian comparison. I find it rather fitting.
No, but it might not hurt to try and find a way to introduce those concepts earlier? The same goes for programming, logic is a segment of mathematics that is essential to programming yet doesn't require concepts such as addition and its offshoots (almost every other operation commonly used in Math). Boolean and Binary logic are the foundation of programming and are simple enough that a 5 year old can grasp them. Sure, they may not be able to design complex circuits at that age (though you might get the occasional child who will wow you) but they could most certainly understand the concept and apply it at a basic level.
Because they brought us "The Witcher" and we'd really like to see what else the Polish people are capable of?
As much as I fucking despise Apple (aside from my iPod classic), you do realize that a good portion of hacker culture spawned around the Apple and Macintosh computers right?
I really think algorithm structure and design (from a math perspective) is more important for a beginning coder than things like OOP and memory management, yes those are important, especially with how prevalent OOP has become, however OOP is just a wrapper around the math and the memory management will flow from sound and logical structures. Pseudocode is probably the best first step, aside from it lacking the ability to be executed.
Indeed. Seriously fuck java. I decided to try to learn Java after quite a few years of not coding (not that I ever got that advanced with it anyway). There are not enough derogatory words in all languages combined to describe my hatred of Java. It seems simple and straightforward at first, but this is deception! (To be fair, some of my issue is with the buzzword like jargon associated with it and OOP in general, fucking insanity). Sure, basic math to advanced math (which is generally what I use code for being a current Math major) isn't that bad, and not really any different from C or even BASIC. But anything you want to do beyond that is a fucking nightmare. Want to poll the mouse? keyboard? draw to the screen? Simple, straightforward tasks, here's the proper syntax, the relevant objects, blah blah blah. Oh wait, it doesn't work? Did you remember to do this? oh you did, oh in that case you weren't supposed to, still doesn't work? hrmmm.....
I'm sure there probably is an underlying logic to it, I'm sure a more experienced Java vet could easily tell me what was wrong with it, but you know, documentation and maybe a reference book or two should be all anyone needs to get through a new language. Maybe I'll just stick with pseudocode and be happy. I've actually been digging C# lately because it makes that stuff EASY. It's simple, it's straightforward, there aren't as many bizarre syntax quirks.
But yeah, easy to understand languages that capture the general concept of algorithm construction are best for intro programming, drop the syntax and buzzword nonsense and just focus on structure. Hell even just sticking with pseudocode for a beginner might not be bad (though, they wouldn't be able to run a program and see a result, so no feedback).
As opposed to the high level gotchas in Java? ;)
Java can be just as obtuse as C, if not more so.
I would think any language that's fairly simple and can produce instant results would be a good language to introduce a child to. I say this because I had BASIC at the age of 5 and I could type out a few lines of code, hit run and see the results (almost) instantly. Better yet was having a ton of software written in BASIC that I could load up, tinker with and then try. I'm not really in touch with most modern languages, so I don't know what's out there that would have that same kind of feel, but I know that as a kid it was awesome for me (granted everyone is different, but hey).
There have been games that have done this before, even well before "The Diamond Age" was an idea in Stephenson's head. The problem is these kinds of games are so few and far between that it's fairly notable when one comes up.
While I certainly played my fair share of standard games as a kid, I also had quite a few educational ones as well (granted some of them were below me, my parents bought me a math game based on my age and not my ability). As much as I hate coding now (mostly due to syntax crap in languages like Java), I love the logic behind it and the games I had that involved various forms of programming to solve problems were always a lot of fun.
I wish I had mod points right now.
One of the best things I ever had as a kid was a TRS-80 (CoCo - and not a true TRS-80 either, even though that was stamped on it) that booted to a BASIC interpreter. The code for any games I loaded directly off disk could be tinkered with easily, no need to compile. This was awesome as a curious 5 year old.
Even better about it were the games "Rocky's Boots" and "Robot Odyssey". These games taught me the basics of digital electronics, lessons which have actually helped in my current career as a technician (with no formal training in digital logic). Seeing this kind of software being produced in a modern setting is awesome, I wish there was more of it.