(fast interactive rendering via DirectX or OpenGL, high-quality raytracing for output, and a built-in Python interpreter... but not exactly free, of course...)
</F>
<SOAP BOX> Re news of some of the latest projects -- We already know that Python is a powerful and capable language. So is C++, so is Java -- a host of others (e.g. the LISP varieties -- some claim Scheme is no longer a LISP (an irrelevant aside, I know)). So I have no doubt that many talented and accomplished programmers are going to use Python and JPython to create whiz bang gee whiz applications that help students learn a variety of subjects. But this is nothing new. We already have an embarrassment of useful software, a lot of which is having a hard time finding its way into the standard curriculum -- simulations, dynamic geometry programs and so on, all with their advantages and disadvantages. The question in my mind is how to open up the world of programming to more people. I'm especially interested in doing this in a non-CS context (my students haven't necessarily committed to following any CS curriculum). To this end, even the best application/simulation/killer app ever conceived, for teaching geometry or physics or whatever, might be completely irrelevant from the standpoint of opening up the world of programming to a wider audience -- because the code is hard, difficult to comprehend (doesn't mean inelegant, just means "done by a pro" (or by a hacker -- sometimes it's a very fine line...)). In sum, when it comes to "proving Python can drive sophisticated apps with GUIs, real time graphical feedback", I have no doubts. I know that's true. But my initial reaction is "so what?". What does this have to do with CP4E? Just being a devil's advocate (a role I'm probably all too accustomed to playing). My mentioning of Struck in this context (earlier post) was in line with the goal of giving students deeper insights into coded namespaces. Gerald de Jong, founder of beautifulcode.nl, specifically wrote Struck in a way he hoped demonstrated elegant _simple_ Java code (he trains people in Java for a living, has flown to Tokyo and places to show how it's done -- not unlike Bruce Eckel in this regard). The amazing thing about Struck isn't how much goes on "under the hood", but how LITTLE. And yet you get a lot of screen activity, the ability to do animations -- from a very _tiny_ reiterative vector processor. I, for one, am not in on this listserv because I'm trolling for potential collaborators on some "killer app". That might happen, inadventently, but my focus is finding ways to open up the world of programming to more students. To this end, I think Python is already adequate as is (as I've been saying from the beginning), and no additional apps are essential to furthering these goals. I'm sure the next IDLE will be even better, and eagerly await its debut, but 0.5 is certainly usable as is. No need to sit around twiddling my thumbs waiting for Guido to provide: he's already made a tremendous contribution, is not himself a bottle neck of any kind. Seems to me that most of the relevant barriers to CP4E are political and administrative. The technology is not the problem. The problem is a creaky, obsolete, boring, unimaginative curricula. What I'm doing is setting some new standards (yes, using Python as a part of the mix), so that I can go out to world and say "look, any of you other curriculum writers _could_ be doing stuff more like this -- don't you think this makes a lot of sense, compared to what's run-of-the mill today?". </SOAP BOX> Kirby