Typed Python?

Arthur ajsiegel at optonline.com
Sun Jul 4 19:24:17 CEST 2004


On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 10:18:18 +0200, Thomas Reichelt
<XXNOSPAMXX at gibts.net> wrote:

>> The code is much better structured in Scheme than in Python. It is a
>> big mistake to assume that Python displays any readability. The one
>> and only thing, provided I were a teacher, which I would never use for
>> annoying school people in introductory courses would be Python for its
>> huge learning curve and its messy behavior.
>
>This is coming close to trolling, IMHO.

Perhaps it is.

But as an advocate of the potential of Python in education, it is to
me not unitneresting to hear, and I do not totally discount the point
of view.

Learning curve, messiness aside - there is little question to be that
the Scheme community has approached the issue of the role of
programming education, as an element of an *education* in general, in
more mature, sophisticated, and honest ways then I have generally
noticed in the Python community.

I recently reread the introduction to How to Design Programs, which is
a book that is part of the TeachScheme project.

http://www.htdp.org/2003-09-26/Book/curriculum-Z-H-4.html#node_chap_1

It expresses in a few paragtraphs some of the inescapable
fundamentals:

"Becoming and being a programmer is fun, but it is not easy."

"Programming a computer requires patience and concentration. Only
attention to minute details will avoid frustrating grammatical
mistakes." 

The obvious.

Much of what you hear in the Python world regarding education sounds
different.

"Python is easy, and learning to program with Python is easy."

Often implying that it is only that others are making the effort in
languages other than Python that makes it seem  otherwise.

Which is wonderful to hear, and would be worth saying, if saying it
would make it true.

Of course, it doesn't.

Of course, its nonsense.


Art



More information about the Python-list mailing list