4 ms·
For “real coding” sure, that holds true. But as for what got me hooked, and what made me study CS, it was LOGO and seeing the turtle do really neat images with
by mrexroad 9y ago
For “real coding” sure, that holds true. But as for what got me hooked, and what made me study CS, it was LOGO and seeing the turtle do really neat images with surprisingly few instructions—I still have a vivid memory of that day and that feeling of deep curiosity about what else could be created by that turtle.
- cr0sh 9y ago> I still have a vivid memory of that day and that feeling of deep curiosity about what else could be created by that turtle. If you haven't and are curious - you should look into what LOGO can really do. It's actually quite a complex language, far beyond just simple "turtle graphics". Unfortunately, most of the rest of LOGO was never taught to many people, and so all we learned was the graphics part. But LOGO itself is surprisingly complex, and has more than a passing nod to LISP in what it can do. I recall learning LOGO as a kid - but wrote it off as a "toy language" even then, until one of the magazines I got at the time (which I typed in BASIC games and other things from) had a game of Monopoly coded entirely in a version of LOGO that computer could run (I never did type it in, because I didn't have the language - and it was a fairly expensive piece of software from what I recall). All the graphics, logic, and sound, plus i/o, scoring, disk handling, etc - were all done in LOGO. It impressed me then; still does, in fact.