On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Jurgis Pralgauskis <jurgis.pralgauskis@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello,

it would make python more attractive, if there would be possibility to try it online like ruby has http://tryruby.hobix.com

maybe this could be made with jython , http://code.google.com/p/epy/ or crunchy on GAE

I have started looking at doing this with Crunchy on GAE. There are some problems in terms of the strict cpu limits imposed by GAE which prevents using Crunchy more or less "as is". But I am hoping to have a working prototype early in the new year. André

how difficult it would be to have a secure thing, for people to get interactive intro about python identation and list manipulation magic :) ?

-- Jurgis Pralgauskis tel: 8-616 77613; jabber: jurgis@akl.lt; skype: dz0rdzas; Don't worry, be happy and make things better ;) _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig

Just to be less ranty, as a math teacher (albeit a gnu one), I share an investment in matrix and vector notation, sigma notation, Riemann sum notation and all the rest of it (set notation, trig notation -- in which the diagrams are almost glyphic, a bridge to a more right brained approach, post-Bourbaki...), however I think what Python brings to the table is precisely it's *differences* i.e. it's not even pretending to emulate these older language games (in contrast to Mathematica, which very much is (MathCad also, the one I use more, Maple in the background)). Sigma notation is a do-loop. Indefinite (aka infinite) series are likewise generators -- go as far as you like, in the direction of great precision. Yes, computers have memory limits but so do meatspace mathematicians, who just right dot dot dot (...) when their hands get tired. Here's an ancient essay at my website giving the flavor of the role I favor for Python: http://www.4dsolutions.net/ocn/overcome.html Plus this one about calculus: http://www.4dsolutions.net/ocn/catenary.html I wrote those a long time ago, but I'm still looking at a lot of the same tools in today's classroom: a ray tracer, a real time graphics engine, a well stocked library of math modules, lots of fun IDEs. The only really big change is the advent of Py3k and its more Unicode-aware design. Plus the new IDEs are looking pretty revolutionary. Kirby OCN.4d On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:31 AM, kirby urner <kirby.urner@gmail.com> wrote:

<rant>

Count me a skeptic that there's anything unattractive about Python that's to blame for keeping it from wider use in school systems.

Once you go down that road, of soliciting off-the-cuff feedback, you'll get endless nonsense about making it case insensitive, adding a "schoolish math" division symbol, or in general making it more like Mathematica, meaning superscripts, subscripts... and voila, no more Python (I call it the disappearing snake trick).

I prefer counter-carping about those ugly computer-illiterate notations, a typographer's nightmare (or job security depending how you look at it): over-indulgence in single-symbol expressions; obsession with lambda, sigma -- too clever by half, a way to obfuscate, not friendly to children (deliberately -- going for that imposing, austere look, trying to intimidate (very Springer-Verlag, the opposite of O'Reilly's far friendlier 'Head First' series)).

Why many smart geeks drop pre- or even anti-computer "schoolish math" like a hot potato is they realize it:

(a) doesn't execute (i.e. is dead on arrival, DOA) and

(b) is designed to pump up egos at the expense of readability, nothing so sane as the Zen of Python at work.

</rant>

Kirby

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Andre Roberge <andre.roberge@gmail.com> wrote:

...

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Jurgis Pralgauskis <jurgis.pralgauskis@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hello,

it would make python more attractive, if there would be possibility to try it online like ruby has http://tryruby.hobix.com

maybe this could be made with jython , http://code.google.com/p/epy/ or crunchy on GAE

<usenet etiquette rant> And I don't understand why the quoted message appeared to be a reply to what I wrote when not a single line of quoted text was something I wrote. </usenet etiquette rant>

André

My apologies for generating such confusion. This is what I was ranting about, not something you wrote:

...

...

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Jurgis Pralgauskis <jurgis.pralgauskis@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hello,

it would make python more attractive,

And I was not disagreeing with Jurgis really, or you, i.e. anything we might do to keep up with Ruby might be worth doing, like having serious OpenGL as a part of the "batteries included". But I've always argued VPython was fine off to the side, even if a nightmare to install, don't need to bloat the standard library, plus we have PIL for the static stuff. These are the real reasons Ruby is exciting (Haskell as well): because how simple computer graphics become, with so little code. Like in Mathematica, you can interactively pass a photograph through the shell, as an argument to functions, and get Photoshop-like transforms, special effects. That's "coolio". Praise Allah this is nothing like the bad old days with Basic and Pascal (or even Logo for that matter -- not that simple matter to code Mandelbrots with turtles, plus it's not as good with data structures, never had industrial strength potential, more a toy, a very good one). In terms of superseding the hegemony and authority of the "calculator warrior" generation, I'm all for using Ruby if that helps. Anything to spare another generation from being left out of the loop, when it comes to globally marketable skills. Ruby looks great on a resume, "know how to use a TI" is far less interesting. There's nothing wrong with Python, in any case, as a language. The Ruby community is very good at hype (on top of having a substantial language), but so is this one. Kirby