[Edu-sig] project Euler

[kirby urner]

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Edward Cherlin <echerlin at gmail.com> wrote:

<< SNIP >>

>> So you're doing that in your head?
>
> Not at all. I can do this example with paper and pencil, and I would
> want a calculator or a log table for larger examples. Let's see...

And I would want my Python shell.  I don't own a calculator, have no
need for one.

>
> 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 2584
> 2 8 34 144 610 2584
> 2 10 44 188 798 3382, ok, 4 more terms...Third grade paper and pencil
> arithmetic for the rest.
>
>> I think the word "programming" is misleading in some contexts.
>
> I don't use the word for anything that can easily be done on a
> non-programmable calculator, an abacus, or a half sheet of paper by
> one with the skills commonly taught (though not very often learned in
> full) for each.

I'm not that impressed by "commonly taught skills" i.e. if a kid knows
how to use a TI, but not Python, I'm inclined to move on to the next
candidate.

>
>> Using Python as a calculator is what Guido mentions in his tutorial.
>>
>> Python or TI?
>>
>> XO or TI?
>
> Similarly for APL and J.
>

Yes, as I've mentioned, APL was my first language and I've worked with
Iverson himself on a paper about J.  I heard from Roger Hui just the
other day.  Part of why I fell in love with Python is because of its
orthogonal primitives, feels like APL in some ways.  Plus the whole OO
thing is way cool, highly accessible.

My oft stated preference is to NOT ever (ever) get stuck in teaching
just one language, even if one emphasizes just one in this or that
classroom or on-line session.  Per some brain science I've been
studying, we really do *not* multitask, even though we appear to, any
more than an Intel chip really does (OK, some do, but at one time it
was all round robin).

Kirby