[Edu-sig] K-16 CS/math hybrid

[Kirby Urner]

> Bottom line, I hear from the "Python community" when confronted with some
> aspect of Python that allows one more freedom to shoot oneself in the foot
> that than do many other languages that, of course, Python has been
> designed for "consenting adults".

Right.  If I write a class method starting with a single under bar, it's
sort of a tacit (consenting adult) agreement that neither you nor I will
call it directly from outside the class i.e. by writing object._foo(arg).  

I could further protect this method with a double under bar, which is kind
of an emphatic "don't touch."  But as a Python coder, you'd still know how
to call it directly:

 >>> class Foo:
	  def __bar(self, arg):
		 print arg

 >>> obj = Foo()
 >>> obj._Foo__bar('duh!")
 duh!

Indeed, dir() obligingly tells me the mangled name of my "private" method:
		
  >>> dir(obj)
  ['_Foo__bar', '__doc__', '__module__']

Now if this were Java, we'd mark method bar as private and be done with it.
Any attempt to call it directly would net a *compile time* error.  You'd be
doing something illegal, whereas in Python you're merely violating a strong
convention.
	     
> With the concurrent thread that it is easy enough for children.
> 

Children understand about conventions.  I draw an invisible line on the car
seat:  sister stays on her side, I stay on mine.  But there's no electric
fence (much as we might wish there to be).  Java provides electric fences.
Python provides lines in the sand.  Children know the difference.

> Define "useful". Yes, I do think if that question is being asked, its
> pretty much game over.
> 
> Approaching programming in any near serious way is sitting at a restaurant
> with no prices on the menu.  And if you have to ask...
> 
> Art

I don't really understand your attitude at this point (that's not a note of
disagreement, but of confusion, aka incomprehension).

Analogy (offered to help us clarify attitudes):  

When cars were still newfangled, early adopters tended to be car nuts.  They
knew a lot about fixing cars, their internals, especially as they tended to
break down a lot.  A "driver" was likely a car geek, a pro.  Then cars got a
lot easier to deal with, and all kinds of people learned to drive, yet
relatively few are pros, plus pros come in many shapes and sizes:
chauffeurs, race car drivers, truck drivers... with many subcategories
within these categories.

When computers were still newfangled, programmers tended to be computer
nuts.  They knew a lot about computer internals and a programmer was likely
a computer geek, a pro.  Then computers got a lot easier to deal with and
all kinds of people learned to program, yet relatively few are pros etc.

Python is a manifestation of programming becoming easier, more accessible.
It's still hard, as activities go, but think how many hours kids put into
skateboarding and/or snowboarding tricks.  There's a teen around the corner
working on such skills.  I encounter him several times a week, working out
with his skateboard.  Is Python harder than that?  Hard to quantify.

Useful:  say I've ripped 1,000 CDs to MP3 but wasn't on the internet at the
time and so didn't have access to a CDDB.  Now I do, and using artist and
album (recorded as folder names) my hope is to post hoc populate my MP3
files with song titles and play times.  

Is this doable with Python?  I don't actually know.  I know there're
bindings to MP3 files, but is album name and artist sufficient to do a CDDB
lookup?  Time to google [1]. I empathize with the kid who wants to
investigate and solve this problem -- and who perhaps succeeds, but
currently has no interest in becoming a "professional programmer." 

Kirby

[1] Initial research:

I see I can do this in Perl:
http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2003/10/03/musicbrainz.html

Here's something I might start with in Python:
http://www.python.org/pypi/python-musicbrainz/0.10

Or if I'm gen-too:  
http://www.gentoo-portage.com/dev-python/python-musicbrainz

And hey, I just learned about TRM fingerprinting.  I hadn't realized this
was available:  http://www.relatable.com/