3 ms·

Languages for "teaching kids how to code" tend to be either: 1. very visual/non-text (eg: scratch) 2. usability IDE/language tools (what this appears to be)

by qez2 3y ago

Languages for "teaching kids how to code" tend to be either: 1. very visual/non-text (eg: scratch) 2. usability IDE/language tools (what this appears to be) #1 is fine. But #2, these should be present in software the adults use. But it's not, which is an embarrassing indictment of our approach to computing. The fact that we don't have Victor-esque feedback by default in our IDEs is a blight. ____ Tangent: famously, in the US and much of the western world (for some reason... meaning Disney, mostly), the culture got it into its head that animations are cartoons which are exclusively "for kids", and if you watch animation, you're a kid. But in fact, there's nothing inherent about the medium of animation which necessarily makes it just "for kids", and another culture (Japan) which does not have that cultural assumption got some great art out of it (Anime). It's weird what we decide is "for kids" and limit ourselves.

sirsuki 3y ago
I disagree with this take. I have found immeasurable advantages to working with non-IDE/non-hold-my-hand-editors when programming. The separation of concerns (editing text versus compiling and running a program) are valuable to me as a developer. I remember as a child learning code in environments like BASIC, Pascal, TCL, Inform6, etc. And knowing that I could use my preferred text editor that I had a mental model about was a big win. I could lookup references in a book and learn easily. In contrast to IDEs which always got in my way confusing the heck out of me when really I just wanted to type examples from the books I got from the library. Call me old fashioned but I have a hunch that the separated and minimalist approach has value in learning programming. To this day I still find doing things with minimalist tools I am far more productive than my counterparts who hunt and peck through menus and mouse clicks. A big advantage I think it this separation and minimalism primmed my brain to see way to compose tools and ideas instead or relying on what the system tells me I can and cannot do.

by qez2 3y ago

sirsuki 3y ago

I disagree with this take. I have found immeasurable advantages to working with non-IDE/non-hold-my-hand-editors when programming. The separation of concerns (editing text versus compiling and running a program) are valuable to me as a developer. I remember as a child learning code in environments like BASIC, Pascal, TCL, Inform6, etc. And knowing that I could use my preferred text editor that I had a mental model about was a big win. I could lookup references in a book and learn easily. In contrast to IDEs which always got in my way confusing the heck out of me when really I just wanted to type examples from the books I got from the library. Call me old fashioned but I have a hunch that the separated and minimalist approach has value in learning programming. To this day I still find doing things with minimalist tools I am far more productive than my counterparts who hunt and peck through menus and mouse clicks. A big advantage I think it this separation and minimalism primmed my brain to see way to compose tools and ideas instead or relying on what the system tells me I can and cannot do.