What's wrong with Parsons Puzzles plus distractors? Or, union of multiple solutions? At an introductory level, it may still be a challenge for a student to solve a problem even if the only blocks provided are part of the solution. The scientific method may be of assistance here.
Meret and Amelia, I love that you included your TS attempt in your lightning talk. It is so important for people to see your process and the iteration of your ideas! I also like that you are thinking about "access" issues and how to include people who do not have embroidery machines. As an occupational therapist who worked in public schools, part of my job was to build hand skills in the younger population. What a great way to embed coding and hand skills together!
It would be nice if a in depth video programming course using Snap would be posted on this channel. Scratch has more videos on youtube of it actually being used. Snap hardly has any A to Z courses posted online.
hey, sese1856! There's several Snap!Courses available on openSAP (introductory and advanced ones: - get coding with Snap! (open.sap.com/courses/snap1-1) - from Media Computation to Data Science: (open.sap.com/courses/snap2) - Exploring the World of AI (open.sap.com/courses/ai1) Additionally, there's the Beauty and Joy of Computing Curriculum by UC Berkeley and EDC: bjc.edc.edu As well as the Snap! Reference Manual: snap.berkeley.edu/snap/help/SnapManual.pdf If you need more resources, let us know.
This year, 2022, we celebrate the 50th anniversary of Smalltalk: ru-vid.com/show-UCzipicZiZ1843jAqmSGgYwg There is much to recommend Smalltalk. *It is supremely simple and easy to learn* which puts it head-to-head with the currently most popular programming language in the world, Python. However, Smalltalk is actually much simpler and much easier to learn than Python! Smalltalk was designed specifically for teaching programming to young people. You can learn its entire syntax in less than 15 minutes! *Smalltalk is supremely productive.* Capers Jones in 2017 showed that it is the most productive of all the major programming languages. *Smalltalk is endlessly scalable, thanks to its object-oriented purity and consistency.* Alan Kay likened Smalltalk to a "software internet" where every object is like a tiny little web server responding to messages. *Smalltalk is endlessly versatile.* It can be used for IoT applications, machine learning, robotics, virtual reality, industrial control, all the way up to giant ERP applications.
If you're like me and just looking to map a scratch script into another language (js, python, others...): Once you're on snap, click on the "file" icon in the lefthand corner, click on Open..., click on the large square button "Example" then click on "Codification". Then follow the instructions on the page (tdlr put your script in the grey box next to "set "script"" then attach "the map to python" box to it. The map to python box is in the menu after the variables and the list as well as further down directly in the workspace. The method didn't work for me cause I can't find the block "delete x digits" but at least I messed up my sleep schedule to help somebody in the future... hopefully. (there's like 477 views rn and the video is from almost 2 years ago)
John, outstanding demo! A lots of cool hands-on ideas for student to learn and to experience different types of technologies using microblocks program with microbits or other devices.
Great info :) FYI- the audio level is very low - I -had to turn my volume up a lot to hear it but forgot to turn it down again afterwards and then got blasted out when I tuned into the Axiom landing webcast! :)
In organisms there are cells, but no classes in the form of objects, rather in the form of genes, i.e. segments of the genetic information (analogue to the byte code in methods). So maybe prototype based languages are more natural then OOP?
Interesting point. Although here I think it would be more natural for the term 'natural' to mean how computers work, in which case a more natural language would be something like an improved C (not in the direction of C++). Something like Jai maybe. Also, the term object-oriented originated from Smalltalk and initially meant objects that can send and receive messages in this way. The modern OO meaning came later with C++ and Java.
I think class based vs prototype based is not so important in Smallltalk for following: Every object in Smalltalk originated from some class, which is object too. That has also some consequences like: what is the class of object class? Where it ends? Smalltalk has nice data model follows consistency. It is not prototype based, but classes are sort of prototype objects in Smalltalk. You can create object of one class, modify class itself, which will on fly change definition of originated objects and make class even anonymous - without any name (that is quite hacky).
@@davca80 I don't know, the Self language showed just how effective prototype-based programming is in a Smalltalk like environment. Based on my (adminttedly limited) experience, its just as effective and flexible as Smalltalk, probably more so.
There is more than just objects. There is the message sending action (not the message itself), variable reading and writing, performing primitive operatings (like adding two small integers), creating an instance, returning the result value back to the message sender. All these dynamic actions include and effect objects, but are not objects themselves. The dynamics is what defines live vs. dead matter.
In Smalltalk, message sending is itself defined in terms of messages to objects, and can be changed - to the extent that eventually you may effectively have a new language. The Newspeak language was developed in exactly this way originally. Similarly, adding two integers is actually sending the message + to the first, with the second as an argument. Instance creation is sending the message 'new' to a Class object, and can again be entirely overridden. To my knowledge, there is actually very little in Smalltalk or its derivatives that cannot be redefined using itself. In this case, it really is turtles all the way down. The only structuring mechanism is objects, and behaviour is invoked and defined through messages.
@@robgrainger5314 That's all nice, but also misses my point. The object situation (i.e. all the objects with their state) at a certain point in time is one dimension. But the transition from object situation A to situation B in time is another dimension. These transitions can be described by objects. But ultimately something has to interpret these objects. You can save your image including the message objects. In this case they are not interpreted. My point is you also need the VM.
@@micknamens8659 In Squeak at least, the VM itself is defined in Smalltalk, and can be changed in Smalltalk. Ultimately, IIRC, this goes down to a C compiler at present, but there is work underway to change that too. At an earlier stage, the VM was actually the hardware, which executed Smalltalk byte code directly. Yes, at some stage it has to run on actual hardware, but from a programmer's point of view its the same abstractions all the way down.
Me working away, youtube burning through my Watch Later list, until this video, at 7:49: "....reading about Ken Iverson (why does that sound so fam--), and really fell in love with APL." Yeah. I've been fangirling for the last hour.
