5 ms·
Not to mention the huge loss of a learning opportunity to have players learn programming language basics for specific real world code
by ngold 9y ago
Not to mention the huge loss of a learning opportunity to have players learn programming language basics for specific real world code
- jasonmp85 9y agoThis smells of when industry shows up at a college and complains they aren't teaching them "what we use in the real world". After enough practice learning multiple fictional languages, learning the n+1th one should be a walk in the park! The important part is the game is fun and encourages learning. That the developer didn't choose to use an "actual" language to do so shouldn't ultimately matter if the concepts are sound, right?
- KirinDave 9y agoLet me prove your axiom wrong with a counterexample. I love these games, and I can program (and have shipped to prod) in over a dozen languages including Erlang, Haskell, C++, C, Common Lisp, Java, Clojure, Scala. What you're saying is nonsense. Practice in programming is practice in programming. If we wanted to, we could make the TIS-100 system real for embedded computing and I bet it'd be popular with some instruction extensions. I did an annex course at a local middle school with TIS-100 to teach kids that programming is fun. It went over well.