[Edu-sig] Lets work on the adgenda

[Tim Peters]

[Kirby Urner]
> Although I think Python will change in some of its "under
> the hood" aspects (e.g. maybe garbage collection), I think
> these highly technical design issues are being discussed
> in comp.lang.python by top-level Python gurus (including
> some posting here).  Why rehash such material in this
> edu-sig?  Isn't that redundant?

Even worse, it would drive away the people (i.e., educators) who really
matter here.  Python developers need feedback on what is and isn't working,
and educators need feedback on what's feasible, but I believe we can keep
that at a very high (& infrequent) level on this SIG.

> On the other hand, if we trully think really basic changes
> to syntax are required (e.g. changes in case sensitivity,
> division syntax or whatever), then maybe we've decided
> Python is _not_ suitable to this job of making computer
> languages more accessible to more people.  Perhaps it's
> time to disband?  Twas fun while it lasted.

Yes, it *was* fun <wink>.  But if C++ is being taught now (brrrrr), the
notion that perfection is a prerequisite is absurd.

> ...
> We'll inevitably be using a scaled back version, because
> we will not be importing every module in every lesson
> (plus we will be writing and importing modules of our
> own design).  I don't see the need to develop a pared
> down Python for teaching purposes when its highly modular
> design gives us that already.

Good point!  The core language is relatively small, but there are still
things you're not going to want to teach at first (e.g., operator
overloading, metaclasses, __getattr__ hooks, ...).  You never bump into
those things by accident, though, so simply don't teach them and they won't
get in the way.

or-if-they-do-that's-educational-too<wink>-ly y'rs  - tim