[LINK] REAL Basic language for Win, Mac and Linux
Dr Bob Jansen
b.jansen at unsw.edu.au
Fri Jun 17 09:29:47 EST 2005
I'm not sure why BASIC is such a terrible language to teach as a
beginning programming language, but then I am not a professional
teacher. Certainly, RealBasic adheres to all modern programming
environments, it is object oriented including inheritance, it has a
high-level graphics interface so laying out the interface is simple
and easy. The language is simpler than others but even then it shows
the C history of its developers.
It also allows a single code-base to be compiled and run on Mac, Win
and Linux and I would have thought that is great for students taking
projects home and showing them to their parents, etc. It has
extensive communications capabilities and so allows for interaction
with the operating system itself if required. So, as far as I can
see, it is a single environment that allows me to start simple and
end of very complex code as my capabilities improve.
We have been programming with Realbasic for some years now and have
successfully delivered a number of products across the Mac/Win
divide. There has been discussion on the iShell list about this
topic, with agreement that realbasic has a steeper learning curve
that, say iShell. That said, I don't think the learning curve is as
steep as say C or a logic language.
On 17/06/2005, at 8:26 AM, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 02:14:36AM +1000, Stephen Loosley wrote:
>> Anyone into languages, and familiar wirh REAL basic?
>> Here's a glowing email from a Vic teaching colleague .. my question,
>> will REAL Basic pass the Link blowtorch re aussie school
>> Con and others have issues with VB compatibility. But given the lead
>> time for new teaching languages, this may not be an issue in 2-3 yrs.
> i have two problems with it:
> 1. it's BASIC. this is a terrible programming language to teach
> it teaches bad habits which takes YEARS to unlearn, if ever.
> there are many languages which would be a far better choice for
> teaching programming. in fact, there are two main language types which
> programming students should be taught: procedural (incl. C, C++,
> perl, python, etc) and functional (incl. logo, scheme, lisp, ml,
> haskell, caml, etc)
> IMO, logo is probably the best language for introducing primary school
> students to computers and programming. with the interactive turtle
> graphics, it's also a great aid in teaching geometry and other basic
> mathematical concepts.
> for high school, my choice would be scheme for a functional
> language and
> probably python for a procedural language. if not python, then C or
> scheme builds on much of what has been taught with logo, and most
> versions also have turtle graphics very similar to logo. python is an
> excellent example of a modern object-oriented procedural language and,
> being a scripting language, provides the kind of instant gratification
> which is very useful for learning programming.
> whatever language is taught, it should not be the platform-specific
> "visual" variant that focuses on drag & drop pseudo-programming. it
> should be the plain variant that requires you to actually program
> than just splice together chunks of someone else's programming that
> don't even understand (a form of cargo-cult programming).
> the curriculum should teach basic programming concepts and techniques
> (variables, assignments, conditionals, loops, etc etc) with simple I/O
> *LONG BEFORE* there is any attempt to teach user-interface design.
> oh, and programming tools should be taught too. at minimum, "make" and
> revision control systems like cvs (or better yet, svn).
> at least a brief introduction to C is essential, too - even if it's
> taught as the main programming langauge. it embodies so many useful
> programming concepts, and there are so many programming tools built
> around it (e.g. lexx, yacc) that it would be negligent to ignore it.
> 2. their web site says "Students simply use drag and drop to create
> software interface, then add code snippets and see the results of
> work, instantly."
> this is not how to teach programming. this is how to teach building
> graphical user-interfaces. there is a lot more to programming than
> a GUI.
> worse, it teaches the wrong attitude to user-interfaces - it teaches
> that the UI is the central & most-important thing about a program,
> that it is the STARTING point of program design rather than something
> which should be considered modular and replacable so you can use the
> same code-base with a GUI, a plain text interface, a text-windowing
> (e.g. curses) interface, or as an automated tool without any human
> when programming, you should spend most of your effort thinking
> about the flow (where it comes from, where it goes to) and
> manipulation/processing of data, not the presentation. the
> comes later, near the end of the programming process after the code
> structure and algorithms have been worked out and debugged.
> craig sanders <cas at taz.net.au> (part time cyborg)
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
Dr. Bob Jansen
Director IT & Senior Research Fellow
Centre for Health Informatics
University of New South Wales
Ph: +61-414 297 448
CRICOS Provider Code 00098G
In line with the Australian anti-spam legislation, if you wish to
receive no further email from me, please send me an email with the
subject "No Spam"
More information about the Link