Re: [Edu-sig] Edu-sig Digest, Vol 31, Issue 16
So I think the following would be handy:
1. equally usable with either "import * from turtle" or "import turtle" imports 2. should open with a window covering at least half the screen (the current default is too small to be useful) 3. should offer some simple configuration choices for things like initial size and shape, but mostly rely on reasonable defaults 4. should offer a class wrapper so that that one could easily instantiate different turtles for a first experience with objects. 5. some minor tweaks to make it better behaved when run from IDLE
Does anyone have any feedback on these ideas or any other suggestions about how turtle.py might be improved without being fundamentally changed?
Note: this is about turtle.py only, for all its deficiencies. Any suggestions to try another library, system, or language will be cheerfully, but resolutely, ignored. ;)
Cheers, Vern Ceder
Vern, I would be interested in testing any improved turtle.py package you come up with. I used the Python turtle.py package last semester with about 500 first-year university students, and two problems stood out above all others: 1. The broken interaction between Idle and the turtle package. 2. Poor documentation. To actually understand certain function calls, it was necessary to read the turtle.py source code. I agree that your other points would be improvements, but, for my purposes at least, they are lower priority. I have another suggestion: rewrite turtle.py so it has a simpler, more modular internal design. I use it for learning about functional decomposition and bottom-up programming; the graphics are secondary. So I would like a less powerful turtle, but one that students can easily build upon. Perhaps a BabyTurtle class with the absolute bare primitive methods could be added, e.g. something like class BabyTurtle(object): def forward(self, steps): # ... def left(self, degrees): # ... def penUp(self): # ... def penDown(self): # ... Toby -- Dr. Toby Donaldson School of Computing Science Simon Fraser University (Surrey)
On 2/28/06, Toby Donaldson <tjd@sfu.ca> wrote:
1. The broken interaction between Idle and the turtle package.
2. Poor documentation. To actually understand certain function calls, it was necessary to read the turtle.py source code.
My tentative conclusion, reading the above, and from some personal experience, is the Tkinter turtle.py, while a fun demo, is mostly a toy and should not be used for serious teaching, at least on Windows. Too much adverse experience. Too much frustration. In general, Tk on Windows has a lot of problems -- I generally forsake IDLE and go to a command window, for good reason. IPython is an alternative (a good one -- once you get it working in Windows, which is very doable). I really don't think *any* kind of turtle graphics is essential to learning programming, although as I said, I think the approach is very viable and destined to last. I'm not "anti turtle". My own special interest is in going back to the very early days of Logo, when a physical robot was used. I'd rather have hardware robots than screen based ones, with Python bindings. SONY should seed me a prototype :-D Kirby
As I pointed out in my message, the reason we use turtle graphics is to introduce the idea of functional decomposition and bottom-up development. I have little interest in graphics, personally. It worked very well for our students, and the fact that turtle graphics is a toy is important: there's less anxiety playing with toys. I see many, many students who have zero experience with programming in high school, and exhibit more anxiety in the first-programming course than in a math course (which at they least have a decade of experience with, even if they dislike the topic). Toby On 2/28/06, kirby urner <kirby.urner@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/28/06, Toby Donaldson <tjd@sfu.ca> wrote:
1. The broken interaction between Idle and the turtle package.
2. Poor documentation. To actually understand certain function calls, it was necessary to read the turtle.py source code.
My tentative conclusion, reading the above, and from some personal experience, is the Tkinter turtle.py, while a fun demo, is mostly a toy and should not be used for serious teaching, at least on Windows. Too much adverse experience. Too much frustration. In general, Tk on Windows has a lot of problems -- I generally forsake IDLE and go to a command window, for good reason. IPython is an alternative (a good one -- once you get it working in Windows, which is very doable).
I really don't think *any* kind of turtle graphics is essential to learning programming, although as I said, I think the approach is very viable and destined to last. I'm not "anti turtle".
My own special interest is in going back to the very early days of Logo, when a physical robot was used. I'd rather have hardware robots than screen based ones, with Python bindings. SONY should seed me a prototype :-D
Kirby
-- Dr. Toby Donaldson School of Computing Science Simon Fraser University (Surrey)
Toby Donaldson wrote:
I used the Python turtle.py package last semester with about 500 first-year university students, and two problems stood out above all others:
1. The broken interaction between Idle and the turtle package.
On windows, I have an icon linked to: C:\Python24\Lib\idlelib\idle.pyw -n Does this expedient not work for you? The -n means to use a single-process model (more fragile, but the interaction of two GUI loops is not there). --Scott David Daniels Scott.Daniels@Acm.Org
On 2/28/06, Toby Donaldson <tjd@sfu.ca> wrote:
As I pointed out in my message, the reason we use turtle graphics is to introduce the idea of functional decomposition and bottom-up development. I have little interest in graphics, personally.
Not sure what this means exactly, but I'm sure there're lots of ways to do this. def g:... def f:... def h:... h(g(f(x))) f(h(g(x))) h(h(g(f(h(g(x))))) whatever. It worked very well for our students, and the fact that turtle
graphics is a toy is important: there's less anxiety playing with
By "toy" I meant something more like "broken toy" -- thinking specifically of turtle.py on Windows. One could argue that it's Window's that's the broken toy in this picture. I'd probably smile and nod. I'm not anti-turtle and certainly not anti-Python. I tolerate Windows because I love .NET (so far anyway -- my goal is to be teaching IronPython someday soon, on Linux boxes as well). Maybe at some future SIGCSE (if they stop meeting in Texas -- I'm boycotting that state for the forseeable future, won't go to any events there (Texas has screwed up the Oregon electrical power scene big time, adding to my bill, messing with my quality of living)).
toys. I see many, many students who have zero experience with programming in high school, and exhibit more anxiety in the first-programming course than in a math course (which at they least have a decade of experience with, even if they dislike the topic).
Toby
The Shuttleworth Foundation in South Africa is looking at Logo | Squeak | Python as a preferred pipeline. The curriculum is designed for self-teachers, home scholars, i.e. no cadre of "qualified teachers" need apply. In this model, we'll have gotten the turtle stuff out of the way (on a first pass anyway) with Logo. Python will be under no pressure to star as a turtle graphics platform (it's not known for this now and it's an uphill battle to win recognition for it in this niche). Kids coming into Python will already be highly familiar with turtle stuff, so we can allude to it (in the curriculum, maybe a Moodle -- I've pointed them to two of mine), but we don't introduce either programming or turtles using Python. I'm brainstorming towards the day when high schoolers with no previous programming experience will be the exception more than the rule. That's already the case here in Portland, in some schools anyway. I hope South Africa will get there shortly (you might think they have a long way to go, but actually South Africa is poised for a great leap forward, in the Chinese sense, but we hope without the same stumbling). Kirby
kirby urner schrieb:
On 2/28/06, *Toby Donaldson* <tjd@sfu.ca <mailto:tjd@sfu.ca>> wrote:
As I pointed out in my message, the reason we use turtle graphics is to introduce the idea of functional decomposition and bottom-up development. I have little interest in graphics, personally.
Not sure what this means exactly, but I'm sure there're lots of ways to do this.
def g:... def f:... def h:... h(g(f(x))) f(h(g(x))) h(h(g(f(h(g(x)))))
whatever.
I suppose, that this is a misunderstanding. In the logo world of computing with beginners, this means to decompose somewhat complex tastks in tiny peaces and write functions for those, wich then can be assembled to solve the complex task. This is the ordinary meaning of bottum-up development.
It worked very well for our students, and the fact that turtle graphics is a toy is important: there's less anxiety playing with
Right! But that doesn't meen that the toy should be poor. IMO it should offer a rich set of means to solve different tasks. Or - as another example, concerning turtle graphics - it should have good means for animationa as are, for example, possibilities to set the speed of the turtle movements or to set different turtle-shapes, maybe even gifs. This makes programming much more interesting for learners.
By "toy" I meant something more like "broken toy" -- thinking specifically of turtle.py on Windows.
There are easy ways to overcome this and they are still mentioned several times on this list. (It's not necessary to blame windows) One could argue that it's
Window's that's the broken toy in this picture. I'd probably smile and nod. I'm not anti-turtle and certainly not anti-Python. I tolerate Windows because I love .NET (so far anyway -- my goal is to be teaching IronPython someday soon, on Linux boxes as well). Maybe at some future SIGCSE (if they stop meeting in Texas -- I'm boycotting that state for the forseeable future, won't go to any events there (Texas has screwed up the Oregon electrical power scene big time, adding to my bill, messing with my quality of living)).
toys. I see many, many students who have zero experience with programming in high school, and exhibit more anxiety in the first-programming course than in a math course (which at they least have a decade of experience with, even if they dislike the topic).
Toby
There are a few important arguments why not to underestimate the importance of a good turtle module in the Python distribution (out of the box as vern ceder says). 1. Many of us are trying to further the use of Python as a first programming language. For them and for their students this would make a great advantage. 2. At least in Europe there ar many teachers who have a good Logo-experience. But now Logo seems to be largely out of date and many are searching for a substitute. As Python has an outstanding clear syntax (imho much clearer than Logo, when it comes to programs beyond turtle-graphics), Python would be a great cadidate. Had it a good turtle module, Python were an even more seductive offer to all those teachers. 3. Compared to its presence in the software world *and* compared to its adequacy as a teaching language, the presence of Python in the educational area is relative is reatively weak. So (many different) things should be done to improve the situation. One of these could definitely be the construction of a better turtle module, which has apparently been started by now. That's a good thing. Everybody hwo wants (and has time to do so ;-( ), should support it. Those who prefer different ways, will (an already do) support those, fortunately. Regards, Gregor
The Shuttleworth Foundation in South Africa is looking at Logo | Squeak | Python as a preferred pipeline. The curriculum is designed for self-teachers, home scholars, i.e. no cadre of "qualified teachers" need apply. In this model, we'll have gotten the turtle stuff out of the way (on a first pass anyway) with Logo. Python will be under no pressure to star as a turtle graphics platform (it's not known for this now and it's an uphill battle to win recognition for it in this niche). Kids coming into Python will already be highly familiar with turtle stuff, so we can allude to it (in the curriculum, maybe a Moodle -- I've pointed them to two of mine), but we don't introduce either programming or turtles using Python.
I'm brainstorming towards the day when high schoolers with no previous programming experience will be the exception more than the rule. That's already the case here in Portland, in some schools anyway. I hope South Africa will get there shortly (you might think they have a long way to go, but actually South Africa is poised for a great leap forward, in the Chinese sense, but we hope without the same stumbling).
Kirby
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
-- Gregor Lingl Reisnerstrasse 3/19 A-1030 Wien Telefon: +43 1 713 33 98 Mobil: +43 664 140 35 27 Website: python4kids.net
I suppose, that this is a misunderstanding. In the logo world of computing with beginners, this means to decompose somewhat complex tastks in tiny peaces and write functions for those, wich then can be assembled to solve the complex task. This is the ordinary meaning of bottum-up development.
OK, so like test-driven development. Write a test. Write a function that passes the test. Get a bunch of little pieces that work well. Then (and only then) start using these pieces to pass other tests (more complicated tasks). In the world of structured programming, this meant: def f: def g: def h: def main: f; g; h But today it might be more in terms of subclassing generic classes i.e. in place of main call sequences, we have more specialized forms of composed and inherited object.
It worked very well for our students, and the fact that turtle graphics is a toy is important: there's less anxiety playing with
Right! But that doesn't meen that the toy should be poor. IMO it should offer a rich set of means to solve different tasks. Or - as another example, concerning turtle graphics - it should have good means for animationa as are, for example, possibilities to set the speed of the turtle movements or to set different turtle-shapes, maybe even gifs. This makes programming much more interesting for learners.
Those weren't my words you were agreeing with, but I guess you knew. I guess I don't see Python as currently very strong in the turtle graphics department. Maybe someday. Maybe even soon. I like spatial turtles, i.e. turtles that swim in XYZ, not just in XY. I played with doing that using Python + POV-Ray a long time ago, i.e. do your movements, then publish a rendering of where you've been. But that's all pretty esoteric. Too advanced for most beginners. http://www.4dsolutions.net/ocn/numeracy3.html (see 'mywalk.pov' -- ironically planar)
By "toy" I meant something more like "broken toy" -- thinking specifically of turtle.py on Windows.
There are easy ways to overcome this and they are still mentioned several times on this list. (It's not necessary to blame windows)
You mean with the -n switch? Why not just use some other language that's better at Turtles than Python? is my main question. If you're going to use Turtles as your primary pedagogy, I suggest Logo or some more sophisticated 3D turtle implementation (there's a 3D Logo no?). Python doesn't have a strong literature. Logo does. This may change in future, but for now, that's just the way it is. If you forced me to use Turtles today, I'd use Logo.
There are a few important arguments why not to underestimate the importance of a good turtle module in the Python distribution (out of the box as vern ceder says).
1. Many of us are trying to further the use of Python as a first programming language. For them and for their students this would make a great advantage.
Again, I don't think turtle graphics is an essential first step. But IF it is, then why not use something other than Python? Like Logo?
2. At least in Europe there ar many teachers who have a good Logo-experience. But now Logo seems to be largely out of date and many are searching for a substitute.
Why is Logo out of date? Use it for 3 classes (?) to set the stage, get through with the turtle stuff, then turn to Python or something else. This idea that we should pick just one language and use it for everything, regardless, is to be avoided. That's not the real world. As Python has an outstanding clear syntax (imho much clearer than
Logo, when it comes to programs beyond turtle-graphics), Python would be a great cadidate. Had it a good turtle module, Python were an even more seductive offer to all those teachers.
I don't disagree with this. I just don't see it as a high priority. I'm fine with the idea of using Logo for awhile, moving to Python when the students are more sophisticated and don't need a turtle to motivate their interest. Many students I work with wouldn't agree to use a turtle. That's something for little kids. They're more hungry to become adults. 3. Compared to its presence in the software world *and* compared
to its adequacy as a teaching language, the presence of Python in the educational area is relative is reatively weak.
Which doesn't concern me, per above. If Python *never* had a strong turtle graphics capability, I would shed no tears. But if it does, so much the better. I have *no* reason to get in your way on improving Python's turtle abilities. I'm just not seeing these efforts as critical to my own plans i.e. as we say in idiomatic language "I'm not holding my breath". So (many different) things should be done to improve the situation.
One of these could definitely be the construction of a better turtle module, which has apparently been started by now. That's a good thing.
Everybody hwo wants (and has time to do so ;-( ), should support it. Those who prefer different ways, will (an already do) support those, fortunately.
Regards, Gregor
Yes, I think we're in agreement. I plan to stop saying anything on this topic, as I'm afraid I will be cast as "anti- turtle". For political reasons, I want Seymour Papert to like me. Alan Kay too. I hope that's OK with Arthur (whom I like a great deal). Kirby
On 3/1/06, Gregor Lingl <glingl@aon.at> wrote: [snip]
There are a few important arguments why not to underestimate the importance of a good turtle module in the Python distribution (out of the box as vern ceder says).
1. Many of us are trying to further the use of Python as a first programming language. For them and for their students this would make a great advantage.
2. At least in Europe there ar many teachers who have a good Logo-experience. But now Logo seems to be largely out of date and many are searching for a substitute.
Have you (/they) considered something like Guido van Robot, or RUR-PLE? André
As Python has an outstanding clear syntax (imho much clearer than Logo, when it comes to programs beyond turtle-graphics), Python would be a great cadidate. Had it a good turtle module, Python were an even more seductive offer to all those teachers.
3. Compared to its presence in the software world *and* compared to its adequacy as a teaching language, the presence of Python in the educational area is relative is reatively weak.
So (many different) things should be done to improve the situation. One of these could definitely be the construction of a better turtle module, which has apparently been started by now. That's a good thing.
Everybody hwo wants (and has time to do so ;-( ), should support it. Those who prefer different ways, will (an already do) support those, fortunately.
Regards, Gregor
Have you (/they) considered something like Guido van Robot, or RUR-PLE?
André
I think it would be cool to have a simple 2D turtle library which scaled up (maybe via PYRO) to 3D simulated robots, then (again via PYRO) to physical robots. But that won't be part of the standard library, so it's out of scope for this particular thread. --Dethe
Andre Roberge schrieb:
On 3/1/06, Gregor Lingl <glingl@aon.at> wrote: [snip]
...
Have you (/they) considered something like Guido van Robot, or RUR-PLE?
When I was younger, in 1986, together with friends I wrote a schoolbook called "Werkzeug Computer" ("Werkzeug"=tool). Then I implemented a version of "Karel the Robot" in Turbo Pascal. It was a complete IDE with syntax colouring, visual tracing etc etc. The compiled code was 64k - 20 bytes approx, which was the utmost limit of Turbo Pascal 3.0 then. It was a big success and was used by some Austrian teachers until recently. (I think it still can be run in a DOS - Window.) A short time afterwards I leared to know Logo, and so turtle graphics also. Now I find this more rewarding. It provides nearly every advantage of the Robot plus a lot more freedom and space for new ideas. (*) If I had the time, I'd like to translate also GvR or RUR_PLE to German, but now I'm involved in my Turtle-Project and maybe there will be a second edition of my book "Python für Kids" - (I well remember, that you asked me for an English translation one or two years ago.) During the last few month together with Mike Müller from Leipzig I've completed a (still "raw") translation of "How to think like a computer scientist - the Python way" to German. (German readers may find it here: http://ada.rg16.asn-wien.ac.at/~python/how2think/ and are invited for feedback ...) You see, I'm really a fan of providing different ways ... But currently RUR-PLE surpasses my capacities for the moment. If you know of a German translation on the way, let me know. Maybe I can put a short section or at least a hint to it in my book....) Best wishes Gregor (*) If you tried out my Xturtle-examples you could easily grasp, what I mean with this. -- Gregor Lingl Reisnerstrasse 3/19 A-1030 Wien Telefon: +43 1 713 33 98 Mobil: +43 664 140 35 27 Website: python4kids.net
On 3/1/06, Gregor Lingl <glingl@aon.at> wrote:
Andre Roberge schrieb:
On 3/1/06, Gregor Lingl <glingl@aon.at> wrote: [snip]
Have you (/they) considered something like Guido van Robot, or RUR-PLE?
When I was younger, in 1986, together with friends I wrote a schoolbook called "Werkzeug Computer" ("Werkzeug"=tool). Then I implemented a version of "Karel the Robot" in Turbo Pascal. It was a complete IDE with syntax colouring, visual tracing etc etc. The compiled code was 64k - 20 bytes approx, which was the utmost limit of Turbo Pascal 3.0 then. It was a big success and was used by some Austrian teachers until recently. (I think it still can be run in a DOS - Window.)
A short time afterwards I leared to know Logo, and so turtle graphics also. Now I find this more rewarding. It provides nearly every advantage of the Robot plus a lot more freedom and space for new ideas. (*)
I just looked at Xturtle; nice work! I am *strongly* considering the inclusion of turtle graphics within RUR-PLE. However, since it is based on wxPython instead of Tkinter, I should probably rewrite it almost from scratch (so that I understand it, in any event ;-).
If I had the time, I'd like to translate also GvR or RUR_PLE to German, but now I'm involved in my Turtle-Project and maybe there will be a second edition of my book "Python für Kids" - (I well remember, that you asked me for an English translation one or two years ago.)
Yes, I do remember. And I still would be curious to see such a translation. As it is now, with RUR-PLE, I have about 50 lessons written (36 have been released) and am thinking of converting it into a "publish-on-demand" book (for those that like to hold a physical book).
You see, I'm really a fan of providing different ways ...
But currently RUR-PLE surpasses my capacities for the moment. If you know of a German translation on the way, let me know. Maybe I can put a short section or at least a hint to it in my book....)
That might be nice :-) I don't know of any German translation in the works. One thing I did this past week was to change the way language translation was implemented, from my own idiosyncratic version to a new version that makes use of ".po" files. These can be translated by non-programmers. At the moment, the programme UI is available in English, French and Spanish. Existing lessons are being translated into Spanish... I guess I will have to do a French translation soon, just as a matter of personal pride!
Best wishes Gregor
(*) If you tried out my Xturtle-examples you could easily grasp, what I mean with this.
As I wrote above, I did... very impressive!! André
Andre Roberge schrieb:
I am *strongly* considering the inclusion of turtle graphics within RUR-PLE. However, since it is based on wxPython instead of Tkinter, I should probably rewrite it almost from scratch (so that I understand it, in any event ;-).
Did you know, that there is a powerful turtle graphics module contained in PythonCard - which is a wxPython extension as far as I know. It has a lot of interesting examples Gregor -- Gregor Lingl Reisnerstrasse 3/19 A-1030 Wien Telefon: +43 1 713 33 98 Mobil: +43 664 140 35 27 Website: python4kids.net
On 3/1/06, kirby urner <kirby.urner@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/28/06, Toby Donaldson <tjd@sfu.ca> wrote:
As I pointed out in my message, the reason we use turtle graphics is to introduce the idea of functional decomposition and bottom-up development. I have little interest in graphics, personally.
Not sure what this means exactly, but I'm sure there're lots of ways to do this.
def g:... def f:... def h:... h(g(f(x))) f(h(g(x))) h(h(g(f(h(g(x)))))
whatever.
I mean cutting up large problems into smaller ones according function, and then creating the resulting program by first writing (and testing) small functions, and then combining those to make larger functions. Your example shows the syntax of function calling, but the more interesting question is how do you get h, g, and f in the first place?
It worked very well for our students, and the fact that turtle graphics is a toy is important: there's less anxiety playing with
By "toy" I meant something more like "broken toy" -- thinking specifically of turtle.py on Windows. One could argue that it's Window's that's the broken toy in this picture. I'd probably smile and nod.
Well, in this case, it's clearly turtle.py that's lacking.
I'm not anti-turtle and certainly not anti-Python. I tolerate Windows because I love .NET (so far anyway -- my goal is to be teaching IronPython someday soon, on Linux boxes as well). Maybe at some future SIGCSE (if they stop meeting in Texas -- I'm boycotting that state for the forseeable future, won't go to any events there (Texas has screwed up the Oregon electrical power scene big time, adding to my bill, messing with my quality of living)).
toys. I see many, many students who have zero experience with programming in high school, and exhibit more anxiety in the first-programming course than in a math course (which at they least have a decade of experience with, even if they dislike the topic).
Toby
The Shuttleworth Foundation in South Africa is looking at Logo | Squeak | Python as a preferred pipeline. The curriculum is designed for self-teachers, home scholars, i.e. no cadre of "qualified teachers" need apply. In this model, we'll have gotten the turtle stuff out of the way (on a first pass anyway) with Logo. Python will be under no pressure to star as a turtle graphics platform (it's not known for this now and it's an uphill battle to win recognition for it in this niche). Kids coming into Python will already be highly familiar with turtle stuff, so we can allude to it (in the curriculum, maybe a Moodle -- I've pointed them to two of mine), but we don't introduce either programming or turtles using Python.
Logo is a non-starter. For my purposes, a practical language is a necessity, if only because some students need practical skills to get programming jobs on co-op terms. Personally, I far prefer turtle graphics in Python than Logo since Python is much more readable. I've suggested Squeak to a few people, and there's been close to zero interest. It's not considered very practical, and the language syntax is generally considered a major problem. I'd guess it is less of a problem for complete novices, but it's just too esoteric and impractical to be a contender.
I'm brainstorming towards the day when high schoolers with no previous programming experience will be the exception more than the rule. That's already the case here in Portland, in some schools anyway. I hope South Africa will get there shortly (you might think they have a long way to go, but actually South Africa is poised for a great leap forward, in the Chinese sense, but we hope without the same stumbling).
That would be nice: "programming anxiety" is a bigger problem than "math anxiety" at my campus. Toby -- Dr. Toby Donaldson School of Computing Science Simon Fraser University (Surrey)
I want to throw out one idea that worked great for me in my initial introduction to cs. In our class our first programs generated simple postscript (ie - turtle graphics) which we then sent to a printer (well, ghostscript first, to save a few trees). By week two we were generating mandlebrot sets, and recursive artwork the week after. http://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/spr01/cs126/assignments/mandel.h... best of both worlds? At least we got to making art quickly. Best, /Jonah Toby Donaldson wrote:
On 3/1/06, kirby urner <kirby.urner@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/28/06, Toby Donaldson <tjd@sfu.ca> wrote:
As I pointed out in my message, the reason we use turtle graphics is to introduce the idea of functional decomposition and bottom-up development. I have little interest in graphics, personally.
Not sure what this means exactly, but I'm sure there're lots of ways to do this.
def g:... def f:... def h:... h(g(f(x))) f(h(g(x))) h(h(g(f(h(g(x)))))
whatever.
I mean cutting up large problems into smaller ones according function, and then creating the resulting program by first writing (and testing) small functions, and then combining those to make larger functions.
Your example shows the syntax of function calling, but the more interesting question is how do you get h, g, and f in the first place?
It worked very well for our students, and the fact that turtle graphics is a toy is important: there's less anxiety playing with
By "toy" I meant something more like "broken toy" -- thinking specifically of turtle.py on Windows. One could argue that it's Window's that's the broken toy in this picture. I'd probably smile and nod.
Well, in this case, it's clearly turtle.py that's lacking.
I'm not anti-turtle and certainly not anti-Python. I tolerate Windows because I love .NET (so far anyway -- my goal is to be teaching IronPython someday soon, on Linux boxes as well). Maybe at some future SIGCSE (if they stop meeting in Texas -- I'm boycotting that state for the forseeable future, won't go to any events there (Texas has screwed up the Oregon electrical power scene big time, adding to my bill, messing with my quality of living)).
toys. I see many, many students who have zero experience with programming in high school, and exhibit more anxiety in the first-programming course than in a math course (which at they least have a decade of experience with, even if they dislike the topic).
Toby
The Shuttleworth Foundation in South Africa is looking at Logo | Squeak | Python as a preferred pipeline. The curriculum is designed for self-teachers, home scholars, i.e. no cadre of "qualified teachers" need apply. In this model, we'll have gotten the turtle stuff out of the way (on a first pass anyway) with Logo. Python will be under no pressure to star as a turtle graphics platform (it's not known for this now and it's an uphill battle to win recognition for it in this niche). Kids coming into Python will already be highly familiar with turtle stuff, so we can allude to it (in the curriculum, maybe a Moodle -- I've pointed them to two of mine), but we don't introduce either programming or turtles using Python.
Logo is a non-starter. For my purposes, a practical language is a necessity, if only because some students need practical skills to get programming jobs on co-op terms. Personally, I far prefer turtle graphics in Python than Logo since Python is much more readable.
I've suggested Squeak to a few people, and there's been close to zero interest. It's not considered very practical, and the language syntax is generally considered a major problem. I'd guess it is less of a problem for complete novices, but it's just too esoteric and impractical to be a contender.
I'm brainstorming towards the day when high schoolers with no previous programming experience will be the exception more than the rule. That's already the case here in Portland, in some schools anyway. I hope South Africa will get there shortly (you might think they have a long way to go, but actually South Africa is poised for a great leap forward, in the Chinese sense, but we hope without the same stumbling).
That would be nice: "programming anxiety" is a bigger problem than "math anxiety" at my campus.
Toby -- Dr. Toby Donaldson School of Computing Science Simon Fraser University (Surrey) _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
On 3/1/06, kirby urner <kirby.urner@gmail.com> wrote:
I suppose, that this is a misunderstanding. In the logo world of computing with beginners, this means to decompose somewhat complex tastks in tiny peaces and write functions for those, wich then can be assembled to solve the complex task. This is the ordinary meaning of bottum-up development.
OK, so like test-driven development. Write a test. Write a function that passes the test. Get a bunch of little pieces that work well. Then (and only then) start using these pieces to pass other tests (more complicated tasks).
In the world of structured programming, this meant:
def f: def g: def h:
def main: f; g; h
But today it might be more in terms of subclassing generic classes i.e. in place of main call sequences, we have more specialized forms of composed and inherited object.
I think the Scheme folks get it right when they start with functions before moving on to OOP. I've cribbed a lot of ideas from work in Scheme education and tried to apply it to Python. Toby -- Dr. Toby Donaldson School of Computing Science Simon Fraser University (Surrey)
________________________________ kirby urner Kirby - question 1. Do you understand why your messages are coming to me as html? Makes it difficult to reply in normal form.
I like spatial turtles, i.e. turtles that swim in XYZ, not just in XY. I played with doing that using Python + POV->Ray a long time ago, i.e. do your movements, then publish a rendering of where you've been. But that's all pretty esoteric. Too advanced for most beginners.
I agree with you here, but keep wondering why you haven't done more with vpython. It works from the command line and its natural syntax seems to me turtle-like, or certainly beginner friendly.
Python doesn't have a strong literature. Logo does. This may change in future, but for now, that's just the way it is. >If you forced me to use Turtles today, I'd use Logo.
I tend to agree. If Python is going to compete for the attention of kids and educators in this "space" it seem to me it has some obligation to do something different. And if Python educators feel that the Turtle approach is so effective that it needs to be part of Python's core, at least make a very overt nod to where the ideas are coming from. There are many people out of touch with the history here. It is easy to assume that people can identify Turtle graphics with Logo and there is no need for an explicit appreciation. Just not true, as of now, and with the intended audience. Let's play nice. Andre is careful on this issue in talking about the history of Rur=ple.
Why is Logo out of date?
In the words of Randy Pausch - "Logo was". To me it's sort of the technofreak ethos -the weighting factor, with anything from year 19XX and before weighted at zero - i.e. non-existent. Strange world-view. I personally don't pay a lot of attention to the Logo world, but the only reason being that I am not particularly interested in reaching children with computers. They seem to be doing fine on there own. But every impression I have is that it is a continuing and active community, building- as you say - on a long literature and long experience.
Yes, I think we're in agreement. I plan to stop saying anything on this topic, as I'm afraid I will be cast as "anti- turtle". For political reasons, I want Seymour Papert to like me. Alan Kay too. I hope that's OK with Arthur (whom I like a great deal).
Hmmm. Loves .Net, admires Kay, and likes Arthur. I'm almost concerned ;) But don't we demonstrate that 2 people can agree about little, and enjoy and respect each other. Why do you suspect that the same would not be true with, for example, Kay? Art
kirby urner
Kirby - question 1. Do you understand why your messages are coming to me as html? Makes it difficult to reply in normal form.
No, didn't realize. Using Google's gmail. How about this one? When I check the edu-sig archive, my emails look OK. I'll see what I can do to fix the problem.
And if Python educators feel that the Turtle approach is so effective that it needs to be part of Python's core, at least make a very overt nod to where the ideas are coming from. There are many people out of touch with the history here. It is easy to assume that people can identify Turtle graphics with Logo and there is no need for an explicit appreciation. Just not true, as of now, and with the intended audience.
Just a nitpicky comment that "Python's core" tends to mean "core Python" and there's no move to inject a Turtle at that level. As close as we get is turtle.py in the Standard Library. Python's other turtles are outside even that.
I personally don't pay a lot of attention to the Logo world, but the only reason being that I am not particularly interested in reaching children with computers. They seem to be doing fine on there own. But every impression I have is that it is a continuing and active community, building- as you say - on a long literature and long experience.
The move back to real robots, as in Lego Mindstorms, has been the most prominent trend I'd say. I think this will continue, perhaps with Python as one of the controlling language options. I hope so. I have a segment on that in one of my moodles, but it's not fleshed out yet (because I don't have the robots).
Loves .Net, admires Kay, and likes Arthur. I'm almost concerned ;)
Heh.
But don't we demonstrate that 2 people can agree about little, and enjoy and respect each other. Why do you suspect that the same would not be true with, for example, Kay?
Art
He might respect you too for all I know. Anyway, I expect we'll continue to maintain rather different positions on a lot of issues. I think that's OK with both of us. Kirby
kirby urner wrote:
kirby urner
Kirby - question 1. Do you understand why your messages are coming to me as html? Makes it difficult to reply in normal form.
No, didn't realize. Using Google's gmail. How about this one?
Not sure, because I am now at a machine using Thunderbird, rather than Outlook. It seems fine, but it might be just that Thunderbird handles the issue better than Outlook, though I am sure I have Outlook configured to reply in text and quote/indent the original message appropriately, and it ain't happening.
Just a nitpicky comment that "Python's core" tends to mean "core Python" and there's no move to inject a Turtle at that level. As close as we get is turtle.py in the Standard Library. Python's other turtles are outside even that.
On the subject of the Standard Distribution, I have one and only one wish that I think would make the environment more beginner friendly- a good bang for the buck proposition.. And that it an IDLE that can accept command line arguments. There is a very specific reason why I think this is important. Gregor, or Art, or whoever has developed a module that works hard to be accessible to an average computer user. And have the appropriate setup.py file created. And the beginning of the relationship with the user is a need to explain to them to go to the command line (the what?) and type, getting the path to where their zip file extracted itself exactly right. Not the way I want to begin the relationship. What I want to say is to go to their normal Windows Start/Programs Files routine and under Python2x open up the IDLE environment, use the File/Open dialog as you have a million times before to find and open the setup.py file, and hit w/ Parameters selection under the Run Menu option and type in "install". Even that process is a little geekier than many like to get, and some will probably drop off, but that's OK with me- that much effort might be acceptable to expect as the price of admission. *After* using Gergor's, or Art's, or whoever's module for a time - something like going to the command line and typing something to get something done will not seem so out of the ordinary. But we are not there yet, and won't be getting there as often we might with this one little enhancement to IDLE. Excellent point, Art. Bring it up on the IDLE-Dev list. Well I have found the IDLE-Dev list to be a bit of a sink hole. Art
And if Python educators feel that the Turtle approach is so effective that it needs to be part of Python's core, at least make a very overt nod to where the ideas are coming from. There are many people out of touch with the history here. It is easy to assume that people can identify Turtle graphics with Logo and there is no need for an explicit appreciation. Just not true, as of now, and with the intended audience.
Let's play nice.
Are you offering to write the history of turtle graphics for inclusion in turtle.py? Toby -- Dr. Toby Donaldson School of Computing Science Simon Fraser University (Surrey)
And if Python educators feel that the Turtle approach is so effective that it needs to be part of Python's core, at least make a very overt nod to where the ideas are coming from. There are many people out of touch with the history here. It is easy to assume that people can identify Turtle graphics with Logo and there is no need for an explicit appreciation. Just not true, as of now, and with the intended audience.
Let's play nice.
Are you offering to write the history of turtle graphics for inclusion in turtle.py?
No. Not only I am unqualified to do so, I am uninterested in becoming qualified. What the hell- say it; The little I have read from Papert sounds to me mostly like Genius Assertions. I have a bug-up-my-ass about Genius Assertions and when in the mood for unprovable truths I prefer to read populartizations of theoretical physicists' ideas. But I do believe in the importance of certain Free Software ideas, becuase I have personally benefited from them. Though I don't think there is a literal rule-book to follow, I think conscience should be one's guide. In that context I don't think more than a demo type implementation should be part of Python's standard distribution without some way of including substantial attribution and I don't think in it self belongs in\ the standrad distribution. Publicize a pyLogo or a Xturtle, where proper and appropriate attribution can and I expect will be included with the distribution. And give them a way to run the install from IDLE. The consensus is to the contrary. I have long since given up on being taken seriously on these matters. My algorithmic skills don't justify it, apparently. Art
Toby -- Dr. Toby Donaldson School of Computing Science Simon Fraser University (Surrey)
kirby urner wrote:
Why is Logo out of date? Use it for 3 classes (?) to set the stage, get through with the turtle stuff, then turn to Python or something else. This idea that we should pick just one language and use it for everything, regardless, is to be avoided. That's not the real world.
This is important. One of the most successful parts of my computer education was early on (the second year I'd programmed a computer) learning a language a week for the summer. Tough course, but after that, a new language didn't (and doesn't) scare me, as it does most mono-lingual students. I feel I got a much better idea of what, in general, programming was from learning wildly disparate languages. --Scott David Daniels Scott.Daniels@Acm.Org
-----Original Message----- From: Arthur [mailto:ajsiegel@optonline.net]
Well I have found the IDLE-Dev list to be a bit of a sink hole.
For those who don't follow it, the most recent post to the IDLE-dev list was, to me, interesting. http://mail.python.org/pipermail/idle-dev/2006-February/002442.html Stani is the author of SPE, an Python IDE that is generally on everybody's top XXX list of free Python IDEs. He is also a Blender guy, and, I'm told, an artist. It no longer surprises me that there has been no public response to Stani's post. Since Guido stopped his personal development efforts, IDLE seems to have become the Phone Company's IDE, Anti-Agile to an extreme. One argument against an "official" turtle.py module, is that it will be the Phone Company's Turtle, and the forces of agility and merit will be lost. To me it is better if folks wanting a serious turtle graphics implementation expect to look for it outside the standard distribution. I am perfectly aware that my approach to these discussion is not likely to get me liked. Kirby, we know, is weird ;). But if I had no passion around the issues that arise, it would be easy enough to approach the discussions otherwise. Probably my approach is Anti-Effective - so the "serious" discussion is perceived to be the one that is held without any overt passion. Too bad. Art
Art, You've made your feelings about turtle.py abundantly clear. I would only suggest that (contrary to your implications) we benighted individuals who actually use the module in teaching and want improve it are also passionate, moral and even (perhaps) intelligent. Or at least we deserve the benefit of the doubt. ;) However if our discussion of the module bothers you that much, I'm happy to move it to off of this list. Cheers, Vern Ceder Arthur wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Arthur [mailto:ajsiegel@optonline.net]
One argument against an "official" turtle.py module, is that it will be the Phone Company's Turtle, and the forces of agility and merit will be lost. To me it is better if folks wanting a serious turtle graphics implementation expect to look for it outside the standard distribution.
I am perfectly aware that my approach to these discussion is not likely to get me liked. Kirby, we know, is weird ;).
But if I had no passion around the issues that arise, it would be easy enough to approach the discussions otherwise. Probably my approach is Anti-Effective - so the "serious" discussion is perceived to be the one that is held without any overt passion. Too bad.
Art
_______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
-- This time for sure! -Bullwinkle J. Moose ----------------------------- Vern Ceder, Director of Technology Canterbury School, 3210 Smith Road, Ft Wayne, IN 46804 vceder@canterburyschool.org; 260-436-0746; FAX: 260-436-5137
-----Original Message----- From: Vern Ceder [mailto:vceder@canterburyschool.org]
However if our discussion of the module bothers you that much, I'm happy to move it to off of this list.
How about responding to some of my substantive points. Or are you saying you don't perceive any? Starting with: What is the importance of having your improved module part of the standard distribution? Why isn't the cheeseshop - http://cheeseshop.python.org/pypi - the appropriate place for results of your undertaking, as it is foe the results of every other Python application developer. Or is the substance of your response simply that I am in discussion with the Phone Company, have been put on hold, and am wasting my time in attempting to have a discussion on the merits. Are you an appointed or self-appointed redactor of all that is Turtle in the world of Python? Art
Arthur wrote:
Starting with:
What is the importance of having your improved module part of the standard distribution?
Teachers in many school situations don't even have control of what software is on the machines their students use. They need to request an installation from tech support. Or if they do have control, they don't have time to install multiple packages on 20-30 workstations. So having a minimally usable turtle implementation included in the standard library would be helpful to them. It's my understanding that this is why turtle.py is there in the first place. The problem is that its usability is *too* minimal.
Why isn't the cheeseshop - http://cheeseshop.python.org/pypi - the appropriate place for results of your undertaking, as it is foe the results of every other Python application developer.
Or is the substance of your response simply that I am in discussion with the Phone Company, have been put on hold, and am wasting my time in attempting to have a discussion on the merits.
I was asked submit the enhacements by Raymond Hettinger. I foolishly thought it might be good to ask for input on the nature of the improvements before doing so. If you want to have an argument about whethe turtle.py should be in the standard library at all, I would suggest you file a PEP or discuss it with the BDFL. It's far beyond me.
Are you an appointed or self-appointed redactor of all that is Turtle in the world of Python?
Why, yes, I am actually... didn't you get the memo on that? Vern -- This time for sure! -Bullwinkle J. Moose ----------------------------- Vern Ceder, Director of Technology Canterbury School, 3210 Smith Road, Ft Wayne, IN 46804 vceder@canterburyschool.org; 260-436-0746; FAX: 260-436-5137
----- Original Message ----- From: Vern Ceder <vceder@canterburyschool.org>
Why, yes, I am actually... didn't you get the memo on that?
The memo I apparently didn't get is the one change the PEP rules. Heretofore they have been understood to be necessary to open community discussion about a change to the standard distribution. Has a the "turtle exception" been issued, is the memo more pervasive. ;) Art
----- Original Message ----- From: Vern Ceder <vceder@canterburyschool.org>
I was asked submit the enhacements by Raymond Hettinger. I foolishly thought it might be good to ask for input on the nature of the improvements before doing so. If you want to have an argument about whethe turtle.py should be in the standard library at all, I would suggest you file a PEP or discuss it with the BDFL. It's far beyond me.
Just to be clearer, I have assumed that the turtle.py module in the standaerd library is exactly the turtle.py module that the BDFL had judged was appropriate for the standard library. And I never had a problem with it. It is appropriately minimal. IMO, a less minimal one is less appropriate. Do you think I am arguing to argue, or do you at least believe that I mean what I say. And for reasons that may be judged wrong, but are not outlandish in any possible way. Which is why I think a PEP might be nice to see if there is anyone else out there who sees it as I do. Besides the fact that - before the issuance of the new memo I didn't get - that ,at least arguably, would just represent adherence to SOP. Art
Arthur schrieb:
-----Original Message----- From: Arthur [mailto:ajsiegel@optonline.net] ... One argument against an "official" turtle.py module, is that it will be the Phone Company's Turtle, and the forces of agility and merit will be lost. To me it is better if folks wanting a serious turtle graphics implementation expect to look for it outside the standard distribution.
I am perfectly aware that my approach to these discussion is not likely to get me liked. Kirby, we know, is weird ;). ...
Hi Arthur and all of you ... we all really know very well that you don't like to liked, except perhaps by Kirby. But that's really not the point when discussing about changes in the turtle.py module. To me this discussion already seems rather strange. There are (I think quite a lot) of people, who use turtle.py, as a part of the standard distribution of Python, for their educational work. Some of them feel, that the module is not adequate for their needs and they propose to enhance it. A procedure, done so many times with so many Python modules. And just in that moment there come two protagonists of the Pythonic educational scene and state: if you want to amend it, then we find, that it would be better to delete it completely from the standard distribution. That's a really weird conclusion. And it lets me ask myself, what interests stand behind this sort of argument? My interests are clear. I've written a book "Python für/for Kids" which relies heavily on the turtle module as a visualiziation tool. (And I've got a really nice preface from Guido.) So clearly I wouldn't like turtle.py found to be deleted from the Python distribution. What I and most other users of the python module want and, I think, many teachers need, is: you can install Python and use it - as was said "out of the box" - with children and young student (and also older students) and thus have fun. A bit more fun would be a bit better. This comprises among other things doing some graphics without having to learn the Tkinter machinery. I not only teach students but also teachers. Many of the teachers of what we call "Informatik", sort of computer science, have a big stress not only with their daily school life, as they normally are also maths, physics or teachers of some other subject, but also with keeping contact to the progress in so many branches of computer science. They need tools they can learn easily and teach easily to students who (at least the largest par of them) don't want to become computer scientists. Thats a kind of cp4e. (Many of the e's will not learn more than one computer language, at least in Austria ;-( ) And of course it has many more merits, as for instance making Python more popular etc. etc. (By the way: who of us uses the really good turtle module of PythonCard? I assume only few, and I think, that is because it's not in the standard distribution.) But I don't want to argue on this any more, as most of it has already been stated in this discussion. In fact I would like to support the idea of Vernon Ceder to transfer the discussion of the development of turtly.py to some separate place. Perhaps it would be possible to host it at sourceforge or something like that and install some mailing list, e.g. turtle-dev, on it for several month. On python.org there currently approximately 70, many of which are low traffic. There are really many interesting questions to discuss and that is not possible in a fruitful athmosphere on a list where two people who do more than 50% of the overall postings (in terms of number not to speak of volume, as it was in the last six month) dislike it. Moreover it would also be not interesting enough for the majority of the participants of Edu-Sig. So it would suffice to report progress and results from time to time here. So Vernon, could you check which possibilities there are? Regards, Gregor
_______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
-- Gregor Lingl Reisnerstrasse 3/19 A-1030 Wien Telefon: +43 1 713 33 98 Mobil: +43 664 140 35 27 Website: python4kids.net
ajsiegel@optonline.net schrieb:
----- Original Message ----- From: Vern Ceder <vceder@canterburyschool.org>
I was asked submit the enhacements by Raymond Hettinger. I foolishly thought it might be good to ask for input on the nature of the improvements before doing so. If you want to have an argument about whethe turtle.py should be in the standard library at all, I would suggest you file a PEP or discuss it with the BDFL. It's far beyond me.
Just to be clearer, I have assumed that the turtle.py module in the standaerd library is exactly the turtle.py module that the BDFL had judged was appropriate for the standard library. And I never had a problem with it. It is appropriately minimal.
IMO, a less minimal one is less appropriate.
This statement seems to me, at least to say, a bit arrogant. Did you ever use turtle.py in an educational setting? If so you surely had a different view! You knew, for instance, that it has a number of serious bugs. Things like this you call "approriately minimal". Might it be rewarding for you, to supplement your opinion about turtle.py with some practical experience? Regards, Gregor
Do you think I am arguing to argue, or do you at least believe that I mean what I say. And for reasons that may be judged wrong, but are not outlandish in any possible way.
Which is why I think a PEP might be nice to see if there is anyone else out there who sees it as I do.
Besides the fact that - before the issuance of the new memo I didn't get - that ,at least arguably, would just represent adherence to SOP.
Art _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
-- Gregor Lingl Reisnerstrasse 3/19 A-1030 Wien Telefon: +43 1 713 33 98 Mobil: +43 664 140 35 27 Website: python4kids.net
I think it would be a real shame if this discussion moved off-list, and a failure of the lists purpose. Turtle graphics have been a mainstay of computers in education for years and have proved their worth in that regard. The turtle.py module is minimal, and isn't going to be taken out of the standard distribution just because Arthur or Kirby don't like it. No-one is proposing that turtle.py be an end-all-be-all super turtle tool, obviously something like that would be more appropriate for the Cheeseshop, and there is plenty of room for such tools. Arthur, I for one have no trouble with your opinions and feelings, but I'm tired of your claims of persecution ("I am perfectly aware that my approach to these discussion is not likely to get me liked.") and your attacks on others who are using this list to have a genuine discussion of python in education ("Are you an appointed or self-appointed redactor of all that is Turtle in the world of Python?"). Surely you can agree to disagree without the attack mode. Note carefully: I am not asking you to shut up, just wondering if you can be more civil about your opposition. Not every educator we'd like to have participate has usenet-thickened skin, and it seems we're already driving them off. Back to the subject of improved turtles, I think there could be a two-pronged approach. The first prong would be to provide incremental improvements to the existing turtle.py (and possibly IDLE) within the standard distribution, while the second would be to provide one or more advanced turtle environments, possibly interfacing with 3D (VPython) or actual robot turtles (PYRO). I'd love to see other alternatives to Tkinter build or advanced as well (I may take this on for PyObjC, and PyCard already has this for wxPython). Obviously, these advance turtle environments would go through the Cheeseshop, not the standard distribution. Both discussions should be welcomed on this list.
----- Original Message ----- From: Gregor Lingl <glingl@aon.at> Date: Friday, March 3, 2006 5:23 pm Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] IDLE wish (was Edu-sig Digest, Vol 31, Issue 16)
Arthur schrieb:
Some of them feel, that the module is not adequate for their needs and they propose to enhance it. A procedure, done so many times with so many Python modules. And just in that moment there come two protagonists of the Pythonic educational scene and state: if you want to amend it, thenwe find, that it would be better to delete it completely from the standard distribution.
I don't know where you get the idea I propose that it be deleted. I have stated that I thought that the current module, as it is, was an appropriate proof of concept. It would never occur to me that Guido would not put the module he thought most appropriate in his distribution. He has always struck me as a bit of a perfectionsit. Clearly it is not a matter of what level of implementation he is capable of. So No. I am not proposing any change to the status quo. That would require a PEP ;) Also I haven't heard Kirby say anything one way or another about the issue of what he thinks should or should not be done with turtle.py in the standard distribution. So I don't know how he got dragged into this. Among other things, I am being sensitive to the fact that the turle graphics ideas - whether I am attracked to those ideas or not - have a long history and identification with Logo and its living, breathing community. And exactly nothing in particular to do with Python. Perhaps I am too much of a boyscout, but it certainly would not be *my* style to include a wonderful, beautiful, and complete implementation of it in the standard distribution in such a way that the connection of the ideas it embodies to Python and its developers can and certainly *will* in some number of cases be misunderstood. But that, I guess, is me. I would love to be liked by all, but it is most important to me that I be liked by me. *I* have no question that the questions I am raising are worth raising, while at the same time wishing I needn't be the one to raise them - if there are to get raised at all. Art
That's a really weird conclusion. And it lets me ask myself, what interests stand behind this sort of argument?
My interests are clear. I've written a book "Python für/for Kids" whichrelies heavily on the turtle module as a visualiziation tool. (And I've got a really nice preface from Guido.) So clearly I wouldn't like turtle.py found to be deleted from the Python distribution.
What I and most other users of the python module want and, I think, many teachers need, is: you can install Python and use it - as was said "outof the box" - with children and young student (and also older students)and thus have fun. A bit more fun would be a bit better. This comprises among other things doing some graphics without having to learn the Tkinter machinery.
I not only teach students but also teachers. Many of the teachers of what we call "Informatik", sort of computer science, have a big stress not only with their daily school life, as they normally are also maths,physics or teachers of some other subject, but also with keeping contact to the progress in so many branches of computer science. They need toolsthey can learn easily and teach easily to students who (at least the largest par of them) don't want to become computer scientists. Thats a kind of cp4e. (Many of the e's will not learn more than one computer language, at least in Austria ;-( )
And of course it has many more merits, as for instance making Python more popular etc. etc.
(By the way: who of us uses the really good turtle module of PythonCard?I assume only few, and I think, that is because it's not in the standard distribution.)
But I don't want to argue on this any more, as most of it has already been stated in this discussion.
In fact I would like to support the idea of Vernon Ceder to transfer the discussion of the development of turtly.py to some separate place. Perhaps it would be possible to host it at sourceforge or something like that and install some mailing list, e.g. turtle-dev, on it for several month. On python.org there currently approximately 70, many of which are low traffic.
There are really many interesting questions to discuss and that is not possible in a fruitful athmosphere on a list where two people who do more than 50% of the overall postings (in terms of number not to speak of volume, as it was in the last six month) dislike it. Moreover it would also be not interesting enough for the majority of the participants of Edu-Sig. So it would suffice to report progress and results from time to time here.
So Vernon, could you check which possibilities there are?
Regards, Gregor
_______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
-- Gregor Lingl Reisnerstrasse 3/19 A-1030 Wien
Telefon: +43 1 713 33 98 Mobil: +43 664 140 35 27
Website: python4kids.net
Dethe Elza wrote:
.... Back to the subject of improved turtles, I think there could be a two-pronged approach. The first prong would be to provide incremental improvements to the existing turtle.py (and possibly IDLE) within the standard distribution... Along this prong, how about a list of turtle.py's deficiencies? I suspect this list will to a lot to assuage Art's fears of over- elaboration. What I have read in the discussion is that a clear small interface is wanted to the internal module.
... the second would be to provide one or more advanced turtle environments, possibly interfacing with 3D (VPython) or actual robot turtles (PYRO).... Obviously, these advance turtle environments would go through the Cheeseshop, not the standard distribution.
--Scott David Daniels Scott.Daniels@Acm.Org
In a message of Fri, 03 Mar 2006 17:58:20 EST, ajsiegel@optonline.net writes:
I have stated that I thought that the current module, as it is, was an a ppropriate proof of concept. It would never occur to me that Guido would not put the modul e he thought most appropriate in his distribution. He has always struck me as a bit of a perfectionsit. Clearly it is not a matter of what level of implementation he is capable of.
A lot of the standard library could stand improvement. Often this is because they were the best-of-breed .... often only-of-breed ... at some point in history, when they went in. Times change.
So No. I am not proposing any change to the status quo. That would requ ire a PEP ;)
I am not sure this requires a PEP. Ask on python-list@python.org. <snip> Laura
On 3/3/06, Gregor Lingl <glingl@aon.at> wrote: [snip]
There are really many interesting questions to discuss and that is not possible in a fruitful athmosphere on a list where two people who do more than 50% of the overall postings (in terms of number not to speak of volume, as it was in the last six month) dislike it.
When only two people contribute to a thread (or many), it is an indication that 1. other people are not interested, or 2. other people feel they have nothing significant to contribute. [I have been in both camps, at various times.] When a new thread comes up that generates interest from *many* other people than the two people mentioned above, it is a sign that it *should* be discussed on the list. (btw, I assume you mean Art and Kirby; personally I have come to appreciate Art's opposite point of view [from mine] on various topics - it causes me to think twice. As for Kirby... Kirby is Kirby; Laura Creighton gave us a great [unintentional] quote about him in a message not so long ago ;-)
Moreover it would also be not interesting enough for the majority of the participants of Edu-Sig. So it would suffice to report progress and results from time to time here.
I disagree. Strongly. It belongs here! (in my opinion) To me, the thread about turtle.py is leading to my ideal kind of topic for edu-sig. Here's how I would like to see this thread evolve: Actual examples (starting from simple ones) of how turtle.py is currently used to introduce computer programming. Fact-based assessment of weaknesses of the current turtle.py in teaching Python or computer programming in general. There already has been some hints of that :-) This tread is great: - It talks about using Python in an educational setting - turtle.py can be used to introduce "computer programming 4 everybody" ;-) - It talks about improving a Python tool well known. I would love to see the same kind of discussion by people that have tried PyGeo to do this. Of course I would love, for a slightly different reason, to hear of people's opinion of RUR-PLE, its strengths and weaknesses. André
The turtle.py module is minimal, and isn't going to be taken out of the standard distribution just because Arthur or Kirby don't like it.
I never ever said I "don't like" turtle.py nor did I suggest deleting it from the Standard Library. Not once. I discussed it's being broken on Windows (the only platform on which I've played with it), but we already know that. I was even willing to blame Windows (then I was corrected). What I *did* say is: (1) turtle graphics is valuable, popular, here to stay (2) I don't personally use the turtle graphics approach at present (3) I don't believe Python *must* have better turtle in order to be useful in education, including for beginners. But if it *does* gain stronger turtle powers, so much the better. I know a lot of educators will be happier if this occurs. And I've learned about many turtle projects I didn't even know about. I said I'd stop making remarks on this topic because someone would misconstrue my position as "anti-turtle". I see I didn't stop soon enough. The misinterpretation of my remarks has already gained a foothold. Please do not repeat the baseless rumor that I am either anti-turtle or have ever recommended deleting turtle.py or whatever somebody said I said. And do not confuse my views with Arthur's. He and I disagree on many issues. Kirby
-----Original Message----- From: dethe.elza@gmail.com [mailto:dethe.elza@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Dethe Elza Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 5:45 PM To: Gregor Lingl Cc: Arthur; edu-sig@python.org Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] IDLE wish (was Edu-sig Digest, Vol 31, Issue 16)
I think it would be a real shame if this discussion moved off-list, and a failure of the lists purpose. Turtle graphics have been a mainstay of computers in education for years and have proved their worth in that regard. The turtle.py module is minimal, and isn't going to be taken out of the standard distribution just because Arthur or Kirby don't like it.
Have said 4 times now that I have no problem with it in the standard distribution. And never said I didn't like it - as it is, i.e. with its current scope. Why does my position here keep getting misrepresented? And no, I am not suggesting we don't fix bugs.
No-one is proposing that turtle.py be an
end-all-be-all super turtle tool, obviously something like that would be more appropriate for the Cheeseshop, and there is plenty of room for such tools.
You know where the line is - I don't. But we seem to agree there is a line to be watched.
Arthur, I for one have no trouble with your opinions and feelings, but I'm tired of your claims of persecution ("I am perfectly aware that my approach to these discussion is not likely to get me liked.") and your attacks on others who are using this list to have a genuine discussion of python in education ("Are you an appointed or self-appointed redactor of all that is Turtle in the world of Python?").
Long history of not feeling like I am working within a meritocracy. Nobody could find it in their heart to support me on the contention that an IDLE that cannot run a setup.py is something to be addressed. Perhaps if I found some support when I try to push a point that is straight-forward sensible (nothing seems to happen without *some* pushing), I'd be less reactive in a discussion that had some unavoidable level of controversy.
Back to the subject of improved turtles, I think there could be a two-pronged approach. The first prong would be to provide incremental improvements to the existing turtle.py (and possibly IDLE) within the standard distribution, while the second would be to provide one or more advanced turtle environments, possibly interfacing with 3D (VPython) or actual robot turtles (PYRO). I'd love to see other alternatives to Tkinter build or advanced as well (I may take this on for PyObjC, and PyCard already has this for wxPython).
If I take my boyscout hat off, and put on my businessman's hat - it seems to me that a vpython in the standard distribution would be a much more significant thing to think and work toward if we are concerned about Python's popularity and its utility in the classroom. Mostly because it actually highlights some of Python's indigenous strengths - not only providing friendly access to high performance graphics in C++, but doing so in such a way that the C++ graphical objects can be subclassed and extended in pure Python. Seems to me - with my businessman's hat on - that one wants to showcase those kinds of facilities. It's competitive out there. And as useful as a turtles might be in the classroom, there are many turtles out there, and there is nothing indigenous to Python about them. Get Python - its turtles are pretty OK. My businessman doesn't get excited. Art
On 3-Mar-06, at 4:57 PM, kirby urner wrote:
I never ever said I "don't like" turtle.py nor did I suggest deleting it from the Standard Library. Not once.
My apologies, I certainly didn't intend to put words into either Kirby or Arthur's mouths. I was only trying to address the "let's move this off list," ostensibly because both Kirby and Arthur had made some form of disapproving comments (not anti-turtle!). Personally, this kind of discussion is exactly the kind of thing that belongs on edu-sig, and it's a breath of fresh air to have so many different people posting on a topic (not that I am anti-Kirby or anti- Arthur, just pro-diversity). And pro-turtle. I wrote my own turtle graphics before noticing there was one bundled (and taking a different tact with it, more direct manipulation of the turtles).
And do not confuse my views with Arthur's. He and I disagree on many issues.
I don't know. Has anyone ever seen Arthur and Kirby in the same room together? %-) --Dethe All space and matter, organic or inorganic, has some degree of life in it [...] All matter/space has some degree of "self" in it. If either of these claims comes, in future, to be considered true, that would radically change our picture of the universe. --Christopher Alexander
Have said 4 times now that I have no problem with it in the standard distribution.
My apologies for misrespresenting you, but that is how you were coming across. I was trying to address the perception more than what you actually said, but I could have made that more clear. I'm sorry about that.
And never said I didn't like it - as it is, i.e. with its current scope.
Why does my position here keep getting misrepresented?
Um, possibly because you come off pretty strongly, and seemed to be upset that it was even being discussed?
And no, I am not suggesting we don't fix bugs.
But that's kind of how it came across. Of course, others weren't so clear about the scope they were addressing, either. There was room for improved communication all around.
You know where the line is - I don't. But we seem to agree there is a line to be watched.
I don't necessarily know where the line is, but what folks are proposing (i.e., fix the more egregious things in turtle.py, so that it is usable more or less as-is) seems approporiate to me. That doesn't make it so, just one voice and all that.
Long history of not feeling like I am working within a meritocracy. Nobody could find it in their heart to support me on the contention that an IDLE that cannot run a setup.py is something to be addressed.
Sorry, I don't remember that discussion, but I don't follow every thread that closely.
Perhaps if I found some support when I try to push a point that is straight-forward sensible (nothing seems to happen without *some* pushing), I'd be less reactive in a discussion that had some unavoidable level of controversy.
I think someone else mentioned here that often when there is no feedback, it's because others on the list either have no strong opinion on a matter, or aren't familiar enough with the issue to push their opinion, or have nothing relevant to add to the discussion. On other lists sometimes people will post with nothing more than a "+1" in the body, kind of like, "Yeah, what you said" or "me too!" On this list, as far as I have been able to observe, people mainly wait to post until they have something more substantive to add to the conversation (which often means we see more posts that disagree than posts that agree, since it's easier to substantively disagree).
If I take my boyscout hat off, and put on my businessman's hat - it seems to me that a vpython in the standard distribution would be a much more significant thing to think and work toward if we are concerned about Python's popularity and its utility in the classroom.
I'd love to see a VPython in the standard distro, but it's not going to happen. The VPython folks have enough trouble getting it to compile and run on both Windows and Linux (the only way to run it on a Mac is to pretend it's Linux, load it up with tons of linux libraries, and run it under X-Windows instead of the native Mac interface). Python runs in lots of places that VPython never will. Tkinter tends to run in most of those places as well, which is probably why it is still bundled with the standard distro. All that given, I'd be in favor of seeing a "more batteries included" distro of Python for the big three platforms (Windows, Linux, Mac) that included VPython, PyGame, and other neat toys. But recent efforts with the Cheese Shop and easy_install are making an uber- distro of Python less necessary, since it's becoming much easier to add the libraries you need/want.
Mostly because it actually highlights some of Python's indigenous strengths - not only providing friendly access to high performance graphics in C++, but doing so in such a way that the C++ graphical objects can be subclassed and extended in pure Python. Seems to me - with my businessman's hat on - that one wants to showcase those kinds of facilities. It's competitive out there. And as useful as a turtles might be in the classroom, there are many turtles out there, and there is nothing indigenous to Python about them. Get Python - its turtles are pretty OK. My businessman doesn't get excited.
Yes, turtles aren't going to be big sales items for Python, but this isn't the python marketing list. Teachers dig 'em, kids get 'em, we should at least fix 'em so they work consistently. --Dethe "Any idea that couldn't stand a few decades of neglect is not worth anything." --Gabriel Garcia Marquez
----- Original Message ----- From: Dethe Elza <delza@livingcode.org>
Um, possibly because you come off pretty strongly, and seemed to be
upset that it was even being discussed?
Yeah I guess I do and I was. OTOH, in reading back through the thread I see that Vern was quite explicit, let's get some basic things fixed and *then* decide how much we want to push for a less minimal turtle in the the standard distribution. I can see that my focus on the 2nd stage disrupted the discussion of the first. I owe an apology and I offer it.
All that given, I'd be in favor of seeing a "more batteries included" distro of Python for the big three platforms (Windows, Linux, Mac) that included VPython, PyGame, and other neat toys. But recent efforts with the Cheese Shop and easy_install are making an uber- distro of Python less necessary, since it's becoming much easier to
add the libraries you need/want.
I am not yet a fan of easy install, and I know I am not alone in that. And there is nothing at all easy about it at the monent, it requiring an install of the installer. My point about IDLE not running setup.py is and was exactly to this issue. I still wish I could get some substantive reaction, I think it important. Art
ajsiegel@optonline.net wrote:
I can see that my focus on the 2nd stage disrupted the discussion of the first.
I owe an apology and I offer it.
Completely accepted for my part. It actually clears up why we couldn't understand each other - we were discussing different questions. As to part 2, I would tend to come down more on the conservative side myself.
I am not yet a fan of easy install, and I know I am not alone in that.
And there is nothing at all easy about it at the monent, it requiring an install of the installer.
My point about IDLE not running setup.py is and was exactly to this issue. I still wish I could get some substantive reaction, I think it important.
I agree, actually. I would say it's just one of IDLE's shortcomings, but I've noticed it as well. This lack of ability to run a script with parameters makes IDLE much less useful for intermediate programmers as well. Add to that IDLE's general quirkiness (esp. on Windows), a few stray bugs, and it is definitely not helping the cause. Vern -- This time for sure! -Bullwinkle J. Moose ----------------------------- Vern Ceder, Director of Technology Canterbury School, 3210 Smith Road, Ft Wayne, IN 46804 vceder@canterburyschool.org; 260-436-0746; FAX: 260-436-5137
On 3/6/06, Vern Ceder <vceder@canterburyschool.org> wrote:
I agree, actually. I would say it's just one of IDLE's shortcomings, but I've noticed it as well. This lack of ability to run a script with parameters makes IDLE much less useful for intermediate programmers as well. Add to that IDLE's general quirkiness (esp. on Windows), a few stray bugs, and it is definitely not helping the cause.
Sorry if my reply is starting to stray from the original topic. Not too long ago I wrote a little app (named "Lightning Compiler") that is meant to provide a nice, albeit limited, environment to play with scripts. It comes with a very simple editor and an interpreter window. It does have the ability (implemented just for fun, never tested seriously) to run scripts with parameters. I released it publicly (and provided a recipe for the online Python Cookbook) as it had a feature (handling of input and raw_input) that took me a while to figure out, and wanted to save others the trouble. I got more feedback on Lightning Compiler in a couple of weeks than I did on rur-ple in about a year an a half!! It might be useful for teachers in a classroom situation. It is available from rur-ple's sourceforge page: https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=125834 On the down side, it does require wxPython which is not an "included battery"! André
Vern
----- Original Message ----- From: Vern Ceder <vceder@canterburyschool.org>
I owe an apology and I offer it.
Completely accepted for my part.
Thank you. For consummating a rare online transaction ;)
Vern
-- This time for sure! -Bullwinkle J. Moose
Mr. Moose is an old hero of mine. I have an homage to him in my study - an old album cover with him and his squirrel friend displayed. Though I can't say I could have recalled his full name, middle initial and all. ahead of me again. ;) Art
I am not yet a fan of easy install, and I know I am not alone in that.
I'm still getting used to it as well, and some parts are not finished yet, but it is clearly the best way forward for installing and maintaining python packages.
And there is nothing at all easy about it at the monent, it requiring an install of the installer.
Yes. Here is the "one-line" (split for email) setup_tools installer-installer: python -c "import urllib; urllib.main()" \ http://peak.telecommunity.com/dist/ez_setup.py \ | python - -U setuptools
My point about IDLE not running setup.py is and was exactly to this issue. I still wish I could get some substantive reaction, I think it important.
I missed the point about IDLE not running setup.py, but I can guess that running setup.py inside another process could confuse it when it tries to do dependency analysis to see which files to include. That was a problem when I included a setup.py-like script in the same file as the rest of my code (for one-file distribution). It caused distutils to do a dependency analysis on itself and include everything for distutils in the executable. --Dethe
----- Original Message ----- From: Dethe Elza <delza@livingcode.org>
python -c "import urllib; urllib.main()" \ http://peak.telecommunity.com/dist/ez_setup.py \ | python - -U setuptools
My point exactly - for the audience that I am focusing on and that with which many on edu-sig are concerned.
My point about IDLE not running setup.py is and was exactly to this issue. I still wish I could get some substantive reaction, I think it important.
I missed the point about IDLE not running setup.py, but I can guess that running setup.py inside another process could confuse it when it tries to do dependency analysis to see which files to include.
It's much more fundamental than that. How does one run any script from IDLE that requires a parameter? The fact that there isn't a straightforward, obvious GUI based way to do so is the issue. A setup.py script requires a parameter - "install". We are back to the command line, and new territory for many, before we have had the oppurtunity to influence them in the direction that ideally, it should not be. One might accept that the absence of a "run with parameter" menu item is a vote for minimalism. I recently voted for minimalism myself, someplace ;). To me, the concern of getting folks access to libraries and applications in a manner not so far outside their normal experience overrides any appreciation of IDLE's minimalism in this respect No other battery included is up to the job, and I suspect that this is a small amendment to the IDLE codebase. And directing them to IDLE to do an install is a natural way of introducing IDLE, and the concept of a programmers' editor, period. Art
On 3/6/06, ajsiegel@optonline.net <ajsiegel@optonline.net> wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From: Dethe Elza <delza@livingcode.org>
python -c "import urllib; urllib.main()" \ http://peak.telecommunity.com/dist/ez_setup.py \ | python - -U setuptools
My point exactly - for the audience that I am focusing on and that with which many on edu-sig are concerned.
My point about IDLE not running setup.py is and was exactly to this issue. I still wish I could get some substantive reaction, I think it important.
I missed the point about IDLE not running setup.py, but I can guess that running setup.py inside another process could confuse it when it tries to do dependency analysis to see which files to include.
It's much more fundamental than that.
How does one run any script from IDLE that requires a parameter?
The fact that there isn't a straightforward, obvious GUI based way to do so is the issue. A setup.py script requires a parameter - "install".
We are back to the command line, and new territory for many, before we have had the oppurtunity to influence them in the direction that ideally, it should not be.
One might accept that the absence of a "run with parameter" menu item is a vote for minimalism. I recently voted for minimalism myself, someplace ;).
To me, the concern of getting folks access to libraries and applications in a manner not so far outside their normal experience overrides any appreciation of IDLE's minimalism in this respect
No other battery included is up to the job, and I suspect that this is a small amendment to the IDLE codebase.
And directing them to IDLE to do an install is a natural way of introducing IDLE, and the concept of a programmers' editor, period.
(inspired by some other posts about silent agreements on this list and wanting to break this tradition ;-) Art: You've made some excellent points! +1 André
Art
Andre. I like Lightening a lot! This is almost exactly what I have been wanting for beginners, and I may give it a try this spring. If IDLE behaved this well and was this easy to use things would be much better. The reliance on an unincluded "battery" is a real drawback for many environments, of course, but it may be worth the trouble. Regards, Vern Andre Roberge wrote:
On 3/6/06, Vern Ceder <vceder@canterburyschool.org> wrote:
I agree, actually. I would say it's just one of IDLE's shortcomings, but I've noticed it as well. This lack of ability to run a script with parameters makes IDLE much less useful for intermediate programmers as well. Add to that IDLE's general quirkiness (esp. on Windows), a few stray bugs, and it is definitely not helping the cause.
Sorry if my reply is starting to stray from the original topic. Not too long ago I wrote a little app (named "Lightning Compiler") that is meant to provide a nice, albeit limited, environment to play with scripts. It comes with a very simple editor and an interpreter window. It does have the ability (implemented just for fun, never tested seriously) to run scripts with parameters. I released it publicly (and provided a recipe for the online Python Cookbook) as it had a feature (handling of input and raw_input) that took me a while to figure out, and wanted to save others the trouble. I got more feedback on Lightning Compiler in a couple of weeks than I did on rur-ple in about a year an a half!! It might be useful for teachers in a classroom situation. It is available from rur-ple's sourceforge page: https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=125834
On the down side, it does require wxPython which is not an "included battery"!
André
Vern
-- This time for sure! -Bullwinkle J. Moose ----------------------------- Vern Ceder, Director of Technology Canterbury School, 3210 Smith Road, Ft Wayne, IN 46804 vceder@canterburyschool.org; 260-436-0746; FAX: 260-436-5137
On Mar 8, 2006, at 2:06 PM, Vern Ceder wrote:
Andre.
I like Lightening a lot! This is almost exactly what I have been wanting for beginners, and I may give it a try this spring.
If IDLE behaved this well and was this easy to use things would be much better.
The reliance on an unincluded "battery" is a real drawback for many environments, of course, but it may be worth the trouble.
Regards, Vern
Andre, I agree with Vern, I just downloaded lightning and took it for a spin. Its really very nice. The simplicity of IDLE is one of the keys to the success of Python in our introductory CS courses. But students do have a bunch of trouble with IDLE on windows. I like the fact that the traceback pane pops up right under the editor pane when you run a script and hit a problem. Regarding the 'batteries'. What if we, as a community of educators using python, did something like the Enthought or MacEnthon people and created our own 'batteries included' distribution of Python. Students and other interested parties would have one stop shopping to get all the Python they needed to use python for learning computer science. What packages would we include? Brad
Andre Roberge wrote:
On 3/6/06, Vern Ceder <vceder@canterburyschool.org> wrote:
It might be useful for teachers in a classroom situation. It is available from rur-ple's sourceforge page: https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=125834
On the down side, it does require wxPython which is not an "included battery"!
André
Vern
-- This time for sure! -Bullwinkle J. Moose ----------------------------- Vern Ceder, Director of Technology Canterbury School, 3210 Smith Road, Ft Wayne, IN 46804 vceder@canterburyschool.org; 260-436-0746; FAX: 260-436-5137 _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
On 3/8/06, Brad Miller <bmiller@luther.edu> wrote:
On Mar 8, 2006, at 2:06 PM, Vern Ceder wrote:
Andre.
I like Lightening a lot! This is almost exactly what I have been wanting for beginners, and I may give it a try this spring.
If IDLE behaved this well and was this easy to use things would be much better.
@ Brad and Vern especially: Thank you for the positive feedback. I hesitated before posting about Lightning as it was a bit off-topic, but I'm glad I did. Feel free to make suggestions for improvement. Also.... did you try to write a program that uses input() or raw_input()? This is, imo, its nicest feature... and why I wrote it in the first place. André
I also like the simplicity of lightning, but it would need some enhancements before I could imagine using it in class. For example, it doesn't seem to auto-indent and requires typing the filename on a save. I'm sure it would not be hard to tidy up those things. I'd also like to handle multiple open files. I noticed on my system (Linux, Kubuntu 5.10), lightning plays well with my graphics.py library, but it seg faults if I try to use VPython. I don't think I would switch to an environment that doesn't play well with VPython, and I'm afraid that VPython is pretty closely tied to IDLE. Anybody know why packages like lightning and SPE (both wxPython) don't seem to work with VPython? Eric (QT-based) seems to work fine. On Wednesday 08 March 2006 14:54, Brad Miller wrote:
I just downloaded lightning and took it for a spin. Its really very nice. The simplicity of IDLE is one of the keys to the success of Python in our introductory CS courses. But students do have a bunch of trouble with IDLE on windows. I like the fact that the traceback pane pops up right under the editor pane when you run a script and hit a problem.
Regarding the 'batteries'. What if we, as a community of educators using python, did something like the Enthought or MacEnthon people and created our own 'batteries included' distribution of Python. Students and other interested parties would have one stop shopping to get all the Python they needed to use python for learning computer science. What packages would we include?
This is an interesting question. I think this idea of an educational distribution has been kicked around before. For those of us in the Linux world, installation of the major non-standard tools is pretty simple. I can just apt-get install the vast majority. For students with Windows or OSX, it's not as simple. I wonder of the cheeseshop and ez-install tools will eventually make it all pretty easy regardless of platform. --John
Andre Roberge wrote:
On 3/6/06, Vern Ceder <vceder@canterburyschool.org> wrote:
It might be useful for teachers in a classroom situation. It is available from rur-ple's sourceforge page: https://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=125834
On the down side, it does require wxPython which is not an "included battery"!
André
Vern
-- This time for sure! -Bullwinkle J. Moose ----------------------------- Vern Ceder, Director of Technology Canterbury School, 3210 Smith Road, Ft Wayne, IN 46804 vceder@canterburyschool.org; 260-436-0746; FAX: 260-436-5137 _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
_______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
-- John M. Zelle, Ph.D. Wartburg College Professor of Computer Science Waverly, IA john.zelle@wartburg.edu (319) 352-8360
On 3/8/06, John Zelle <john.zelle@wartburg.edu> wrote:
I also like the simplicity of lightning, but it would need some enhancements before I could imagine using it in class. For example, it doesn't seem to auto-indent and requires typing the filename on a save. I'm sure it would not be hard to tidy up those things. I'd also like to handle multiple open files.
Indeed, I don't think it would be too hard to fix these. I'll keep them in mind for the next time I look at the code. However, one of my goals is to keep it as simple as possible, mostly used as a quick testing or demo environment; I like to use SPE for serious coding.
I noticed on my system (Linux, Kubuntu 5.10), lightning plays well with my graphics.py library, but it seg faults if I try to use VPython. I don't think I would switch to an environment that doesn't play well with VPython, and I'm afraid that VPython is pretty closely tied to IDLE. Anybody know why packages like lightning and SPE (both wxPython) don't seem to work with VPython? Eric (QT-based) seems to work fine.
I tried to run a sample program from the VPython web page in the "editor" window and it ran fine (under Windows XP); however, closing the VPython window killed the whole app. The same sample program seemed to hang the embedded Shell... I agree that this would be a major show-stopper for using it in a classroom with VPython :-( André
John M. Zelle, Ph.D. Wartburg College Professor of Computer Science Waverly, IA john.zelle@wartburg.edu (319) 352-8360 _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
On 3/8/06, John Zelle <john.zelle@wartburg.edu> wrote:
On Wednesday 08 March 2006 14:54, Brad Miller wrote:
I just downloaded lightning and took it for a spin. Its really very nice. The simplicity of IDLE is one of the keys to the success of Python in our introductory CS courses. But students do have a bunch of trouble with IDLE on windows. I like the fact that the traceback pane pops up right under the editor pane when you run a script and hit a problem.
Regarding the 'batteries'. What if we, as a community of educators using python, did something like the Enthought or MacEnthon people and created our own 'batteries included' distribution of Python. Students and other interested parties would have one stop shopping to get all the Python they needed to use python for learning computer science. What packages would we include?
This is an interesting question. I think this idea of an educational distribution has been kicked around before. For those of us in the Linux world, installation of the major non-standard tools is pretty simple. I can just apt-get install the vast majority. For students with Windows or OSX, it's not as simple. I wonder of the cheeseshop and ez-install tools will eventually make it all pretty easy regardless of platform.
I know that at PyCon, Raymond Hettinger and others from Python_dev were discussing an "educational" package for Python. I suspect it will be easy to get buy-in and support from that group if we can get a list together of what we want in the package. Anna
participants (14)
-
ajsiegel＠optonline.net -
Andre Roberge -
Anna Ravenscroft -
Arthur
-
Brad Miller -
Dethe Elza -
Gregor Lingl -
John Zelle -
Jonah Bossewitch -
kirby urner -
Laura Creighton -
Scott David Daniels -
Toby Donaldson -
Vern Ceder