Mailman 3 January 2003 - Edu-sig

Re: Edu-sig digest, Vol 1 #638 - 9 msgs
by ahimsa 25 Jan '03

25 Jan '03

On Sat, 2003-01-25 at 17:00, Arthur wrote: > Certainly the history of math and philosophy are intertwined to very strong > degree. I think both Kirby and myself are trying - partly through the use > of technology - to revitalize an interest in mathematics, as it relates to > philosophy, art, design, etc. > > These is *not* a new concept. The concept that mathematics is somehow > divorced from these pursuits is the new concept. A newer new concept, which > is an old concept, is the convergence. You have probably read Douglas Hofstadter's (now old) book "The Eternal Golden Braid: Godel, Escher, Bach". That Hofstadter was able to trace the intersections among three semingly diverse conceptual/expressive/creative fields underscores what both Kirby and yourself have pointed out: the degree of confluence is a recent discovery, but rather a recent re-discovery of something that many grand masters knew way back when. I suspect that the split - and the ignorance of said confluence that was spawned - might have been in those days of yore when science (and all things scientific) were governed by the rogour of the 'scientific method' and that those domains considered more expressive and creative were artificially hacked off with conceptual machettes as belonging to someone else's department. Over the last 30 or so years there also seems to have been a progressive diminishing of the importance of creative expression (arts programmes, even humanities tend to receive less funding in academic domains than do scientific/pure technology-driven departments). If you have not yet had an opportunity to read Gregory Bateson's "Steps to an ecology of mind" or "Mind/Nature: A necessary unity" I would encourage you do so. Both books are quite phenomenal undertakings (not as in thick tomes but in their ambition of scope), and have influenced quite a number of different fields from psychotherapy to cybernetics, but one of the strands is the interconnected pattern - "the pattern that connects" - between the phylogenesis of the crab's claw, the dimensions of flowers petals, and human communication patterns. Anyway, all this to say that the divisions between math, art, and now computer programming are imposed cleavages, and the cleavage can be moved to include or to exclude one or more of these (traditionally regarded as) disparate threads. That Kirby and yourself (and doubtless others too) are working at minimising that artificial boundary is good news, and should facilitate some interesting developments in the field of programming (and math and art). > I happen to be fascinated by projective geometry. It was developed intially > by great artists, in studying perspective, then formalized by great > philosophers, some of whom were also considered to be the great > mathematicians of their day (or vice, versa - depending on how one wants to > look at it). In fact many liberal artists hardly understand that the names > they know as the significant philosophers, are the same names one studies in > the history of mathematics. This is true into the modern era. I didn't > understand it, until I began studying mathematics - which I happen to do in > conjunction with studying programming. Lots of fireworks went off, in fact. > > And giving strong emphasis to visual mathematics is - as of today, I think - > elevating it, rather than dumbing it down. Chaos theory, as Kirby points > out. Wolfram's work. Many, many other examples. > > There *is* something to overcome, in terms of resistance. > > At one point some young folk - I think high schoolers - joined in to a > discussion here, protesting the concept of bringing to together math and > programming curriculum. They like programming and are good at it, they hate > math and are bad at it. > > I don't blame them - if math is being presented to them as it was presented > to me. That is probably the source of my own aversion to math: I hate to blame my teachers and no doubt I was also probably a lazy sod :) - but whatever it was, I now do have to work really hard to overcome that resistance, despite my appreciation for the sheer beauty of geometry and algebra at the 'safer' and more 'abstract' level of a philosophical appreciation. > I like to think they would by no means hate math taught by Kirby or myself, > though. If you want a guinea pig - try me: I could benefit from a decent math education and I'd be upfront in giving you feedback!! > If they don't like history, philosophy, art -- they might have a problem, > though. I am absolutely fine there - history is interesting, but philosophy and art ... yep, I do certainly enjoy those. Seriously though, I do think that the project you (and Kirby) describe is important. The way that one field connects to another, that the boundary that separates one academic discipline from another is really a common wall that joins the two, these are important aspects that seem to be in retreat from much academic discourse: there is such an emphasis on specialisation and sub-specialisation that one can get a PhD in something and have absolutely no idea how one's field relates to any others. To (mis)quote Felix Guattari (of Deleuze & Guattari fame or infamy): we need an ecology of ideas. I'd better stop: I can feel a raving swelling up within me ;-) All the best Andrew

1 0

Idle for Mac?
by Christian Mascher 25 Jan '03

25 Jan '03

Hello all, I am used to working with Python on Windows at our school. Unfortunately I will probably have to use "the other computer room" with macintosh computers in the near future. So I would be happy to install python on those machines. At least I get python anywhere ;-) Sadly, looking into the archives, it seams as if I wouldn't be able to use the Idle shell under MacOS. Does anybody in this group know if Idlefork might work? And does this only go with OSX? Thanks Christian

2 1

re: python turtle-like graphics (and more)
by Arthur 25 Jan '03

25 Jan '03

>Feedback welcome. Quick look. The graphic output looks great! I'm ready to play. Art

1 0

python turtle-like graphics (and more)
by Lee Harr 25 Jan '03

25 Jan '03

Hi; I wrote a python- and pygame-based turtle graphics system. It is actually part of a larger framework which I am hoping to use as an adjunct to a get-started-programming book I am writing. The code is available under the GPL. The latest version is here: http://savannah.nongnu.org/download/pygsear/pygsear-0.pkg/0.23/pygsear-0.23… The project page is: http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/pygsear/ Feedback welcome. _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

1 0

Re: On-Topic: LinuxFormat Magazine
by ahimsa 25 Jan '03

25 Jan '03

On Thu, 2003-01-23 at 23:40, Patrick K. O'Brien wrote: > Message: 11 > From: "Patrick K. O'Brien" <pobrien(a)orbtech.com> > Organization: Orbtech > To: edu-sig(a)python.org > Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 17:40:08 -0600 > Subject: [Edu-sig] On-Topic: LinuxFormat Magazine > > Just to prove I can stay on-topic, here is a bit of good news: a series of > Python tutorials will be appearing in LinuxFormat magazine beginning with > issue #38, written by yours truly. Great !!! I look forward to reading it, since I subscribe to LXF. This month it should be issue #37 so I guess #38 comes out end of February. How many issues will it appear in - i.e. how many parts? Andrew -- ahimsa <ahimsa(a)onetel.net.uk>

2 2

Re: Losing the Plot
by Arthur 25 Jan '03

25 Jan '03

Andrew writes - >>Indeed - math has made a science of the algorithm. Yet I can't help but >>wonder whether or not it is the emphasis on math and such technicality >>that tends to leave many feeling excluded from (or reluctant to attempt) >>programming. Consequently, this emphasis might have a tendency to elide Kirby writes- >That's a good point too. I take a page from the explosive popularity >of fractals. Here was a grass-roots, up welling of interest on the part >of not math-specialists. With computers, we can do art. Math and art >may be bridged, especially through geometry, and here especially is >where computers really shine (PyGeo is a good example) -- much more so >than calculators. I had specifically logged on line to respond to this same point of Andrews, in a very similar way. Kirby beat me to it. Certainly the history of math and philosophy are intertwined to very strong degree. I think both Kirby and myself are trying - partly through the use of technology - to revitalize an interest in mathematics, as it relates to philosophy, art, design, etc. These is *not* a new concept. The concept that mathematics is somehow divorced from these pursuits is the new concept. A newer new concept, which is an old concept, is the convergence. I happen to be fascinated by projective geometry. It was developed intially by great artists, in studying perspective, then formalized by great philosophers, some of whom were also considered to be the great mathematicians of their day (or vice, versa - depending on how one wants to look at it). In fact many liberal artists hardly understand that the names they know as the significant philosophers, are the same names one studies in the history of mathematics. This is true into the modern era. I didn't understand it, until I began studying mathematics - which I happen to do in conjunction with studying programming. Lots of fireworks went off, in fact. And giving strong emphasis to visual mathematics is - as of today, I think - elevating it, rather than dumbing it down. Chaos theory, as Kirby points out. Wolfram's work. Many, many other examples. There *is* something to overcome, in terms of resistance. At one point some young folk - I think high schoolers - joined in to a discussion here, protesting the concept of bringing to together math and programming curriculum. They like programming and are good at it, they hate math and are bad at it. I don't blame them - if math is being presented to them as it was presented to me. I like to think they would by no means hate math taught by Kirby or myself, though. If they don't like history, philosophy, art -- they might have a problem, though. Art

1 0

Re: Losing the Plot
by ahimsa 24 Jan '03

24 Jan '03

On Thu, 2003-01-23 at 13:40, Kirby Urner wrote: > People have taken the broad mission of CP4E (computer programming for > everyone) and run with it in various directions. > > One of the most obvious directions is into the schools. > > And there you get a fork in the road, with most heading towards the computer > science curriculum, but others of us exploring the role of programming > (and other modes of computer use) in other parts of the curriculum as well > e.g. in math class (there's a tradition here too of course, which precedes > Python -- Seymour Papert's Logo initiative for example). > > Also, under the broad heading of "school", there's this question of levels > or target audience -- are we talking college, high school, earlier? or > maybe adult education? All of the above no doubt. But each individual > will have their bias/strength. > > What I learned about from Jeff Elkner's posts and web pages over the years > (he introduced Python to high schoolers at his school -- also Linux based), > is the importance of a text, at least something on-line that's printable, > if not a bound text book. He uses 'How to Think Like a Computer > Scientist', which he adapted from the original to work with Python. > This work is on-line. > I understand Tim Wilson (also on this list) does so too with his work at Henry Sibley (sorry Tim - don't mean to speak for you). > I had recent discussions with a teacher casting about for a language > to use in a computer intro course (high school level). He was drawn > to Scheme, largely on the strength of this resource: http://www.htdp.org/ > (How to Design Programs), which is indeed the kind of thing a teacher > looks for when designing a course. He had every right to be excited > about it. I am presently printing off the HTDP book in installments and have read snippets of it and it does seem pretty good. I believe that the exemplar language is Dr.Scheme isn't it - a variation of Scheme. I was thinking of downloading the language and its associated files and playing around with it. I probably will, once I've finished printing off the text. I must be cautious however and not rush madly from one thing to the next, and I think that is one of the values of a more formalised instruction process. On the Feb 4th I start with an eight week course in C programming, which I'm looking forward to as that will be the first time I have ever attended any formal instruction in computing. > I told this teacher that I thought highly of Scheme (which I do -- it's > always on my list as a candidate intro language) and its educational > materials, but that it's also my view that an intro course (especially > an intro course) should look at (at least) two languages, in part > because it's in comparing and contrasting them that some of the > commonalities leap to the fore -- helping to bring home some of the > more abstract concepts (flow of control, named functions, parameters, > data structures ...). I understand what you mean here: this has become more apparent to me as I read more, and especially more widely (e.g. Sturcture & Interpretation of Computer Programs, and Foundations of Programming) because although SICP is written using Lisp as the example and FoP cuts across languages but focuses on Basic, Pascal, and a bit of C. Certainly flow of control, declarations, data abstractions seem to be themes that surface again and again. Much of it leaves me in the dark, but since I don't need to swot the material that deeply it gives me the opportunity to get more of an overview of generalities which is quite useful. > Beginners will better appreciate the world they're entering if they get > exposure to some of the variety that's out there (nothing like a couple > hours with J to blow one's mind re the stuff people find useful). > > I recommended Python as a good candidate for a second language, in part > because, unlike Scheme, it really makes the class/object model accessible > right at the outset (with the everything-is-an-object paradigm -- with > users rolling new types of their own). > > Although maybe not precisely CP4E's official intent, I look at "computer > programming for everyone" as meaning more than everyone learning Python. > Python is a good way to get *access* to programming, but then you find > yourself learning all kinds of little languages, from Lego Mindstorms > to some JavaScript to your calculator, to programming your VCR. And > this is actually in harmony with Python's goals as a language -- it's > a "glue language" (i.e. "works well with others") and also an "API > language" (often used to bind an application's functionality to some > syntax scriptable "from the outside"). > > I emphasize the above because I think it's possible for CP4Eers (people > who've taken on this mission) to be pro Python without being tiresomely > negatory towards all other languages, thereby falling into one of those > deep "language war" wells which dot the internet landscape like so many > vortices from hell (loud sucking sounds). It's not about Python OR > Scheme or Python OR C# or Python OR Java. It's about Python AND _____ > (fill in the blank, with as many languages as you wish). Good point - I appreciate the inclusivity. > That being said, it makes sense to play up Python's strengths. No need > to be shy. > > Lots of CS teachers are indeed moving to Python. > There's a question here as to whether programming mirrors our thought > process or whether, after we program for awhile, our thought process > starts to take on some features of programming. Certainly it's a > great source of metaphors. Indeed it is. > The books usually say "objects" (in the programmed sense) are metaphors > for objects in the real world i.e. the problem space is modeled by the > solution space in terms of objects. But it works the other way too: > getting used to thinking of composition and inheritance affects the > way you see the real world (suddenly, that cell phone "really is" a > subclass of the more generic telephone class, and so on). I come from a psych and philosophy background, and this taps into a whole bunch of issues from those fields - the notions of 'reality' and the constructions of reality, the idea/image or simulcra and the whole question of representation, ... . The lens of language (non-computing) inform the way that we perceive and interact with our worlds (introducing the ideas of discourse and interpretive frames, for example), so it makes good sense that when one learns computing language as a means of representing 'reality' (putting to one side the important questions about that particular concept!), the 'world' begins to 'resemble' (or perhaps more germanely - becomes 're-assembled'!) according to the codes of reference of that language. In philosophy, one of the issues has been the extent of interleaving between concepts and that which they are said to represent: when we have a concept for microscopic particles (e.g. virii or bacteria) it is easier to 'see' them with a microscope. The beauty of a well-written program does not become apparent unless one knows what one is looking at. Before Object Oriented Programming, the notion of using objects was foreign to programmers; once upon a time, it was unheard of not to use 'goto' in a program; now it is almost bad manners to use 'goto'. > Good thing my dog here overrides some of those wolf methods, with more > domesticated versions. LOL - some inheritance features *should* be surpressed!! > Shouldn't programming be taught hand-in-hand with mathematics, which is > already so vested in "algorithms"? Indeed - math has made a science of the algorithm. Yet I can't help but wonder whether or not it is the emphasis on math and such technicality that tends to leave many feeling excluded from (or reluctant to attempt) programming. Consequently, this emphasis might have a tendency to elide the creativity and the *art* that is also a seemingly key aspect of programming. Perhaps then, both and ... altho' the relative time of introduction might be an important consideration. > PyCrust is cool. I've used it with pleasure. I should find the latest > version and play with it some more. > > Kirby Now that Patrick has given me a virtual road map to get it, I too will make a note to play around with it. Thank you Kirby for answering my request for info with such a generous response. All the best Andrew -- ________________________%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%____________________________ Proudly sent using Ximian Evolution 1.2.1 on a Linux Red Hat 8.0 box.

2 1

Re: [Edu-sig] Losing the plot
by Patrick K. O'Brien 24 Jan '03

24 Jan '03

On Thursday 23 January 2003 04:45 pm, ahimsa wrote: > On Thu, 2003-01-23 at 22:23, Patrick K. O'Brien wrote: > > Here is the description I have on the main SourceForge page: > > > > "PyCrust is an interactive Python shell written in Python using > > wxPython. The latest stable version ships with wxPython > > (www.wxpython.org). The latest development version can be checked out > > of CVS. Packaged file releases are no longer available here." > > > > Is that not clear? > > Actually no - not if one is looking for something that says 'PyCrust' as > something that ships *with* (as in a module/additional component to > rather than subsumed *within*) wxPython. Since you asked > Andrew Funny, I had to read your comment and my description several times before I saw where my description was misleading. One challenge is that SF limits the description to 255 characters. Is this one better? "PyCrust is an interactive Python shell written in Python using wxPython. The latest release is now included with wxPython (www.wxpython.org). The development version can still be checked out of CVS. Packaged file releases are no longer available here." -- Patrick K. O'Brien Orbtech http://www.orbtech.com/web/pobrien ----------------------------------------------- "Your source for Python programming expertise." -----------------------------------------------

2 3

On-Topic: LinuxFormat Magazine
by Patrick K. O'Brien 24 Jan '03

24 Jan '03

Just to prove I can stay on-topic, here is a bit of good news: a series of Python tutorials will be appearing in LinuxFormat magazine beginning with issue #38, written by yours truly. -- Patrick K. O'Brien Orbtech http://www.orbtech.com/web/pobrien ----------------------------------------------- "Your source for Python programming expertise." -----------------------------------------------

2 2

re: Losing the plot
by Arthur 24 Jan '03

24 Jan '03

Patrick was challenging my consecutive post record, so I thought I should get something up quickly. Jaime writes - >Where can I find PyCrust? It would be very insteresting to put a link to it, >together with links to PyGeo, Kirby's pages --and others that I must not be >aware since I new to this list-- in a single page. >Is there room for that in the edu SIG pages at python.org? There are projects listed on the edu-sig page, but the page is quite stale and I'm not sure it is being maintained at all anymore. I've tried a number of times to have the PyGeo link and description corrected - but to no avail. There was an earlier PyOpenGL based PyGeo that predated VPython - plus the web site has changed. Besides liking for my own reasons to have the correct link, I do think dead links are embarassing and give a bad impression. But its not fully clear to me what you are hoping to do. But yes it would be great, I think, if we could have sort of a community site. (After we work on the community part some more). One subplot - As a community, there seems to me to be 2 fundamental threads - those who's specific interest is in a focused approach to teaching programming as a subject matter, and those who feel programming can also be introduced embedded in other curriculum, an enhancement to other curriculum - but with the programming understanding hopefully gained in the process something more than a side effect. One important thing those two schools of interest seem to have in common - Python! Sometimes not much elae. But that should be OK. Both schools of interest seem to conclude that Python has unique features to facilitate the learning process that they are interested in facilitating. And I don't think there should a problem defining this community broadly enough to be inclusive of these approaches. Art

1 0