[Edu-sig] Freedom: some Smalltalk history and Python implications

[kirby urner]

> Is your curriculum available online somewhere? I'd be very interested in
> finding out what parts could be done easily and what parts could not. We
> have been talking for a while now to step up the age group a little and
> it sounds as if this may make an interesting case study.
>

http://www.4dsolutions.net/ocn/

Drill down to http://www.4dsolutions.net/ocn/cp4e.html for Python.

Good overview:
http://www.4dsolutions.net/ocn/numeracy0.html -- numeracy3.html

Background:
http://www.4dsolutions.net/ocn/trends2000.html (importance of OO).

For more of the spatial geometry stuff:
http://www.grunch.net/synergetics/volumes.html

> > I don't want to get involved in a bait and switch situation, where the
> > Squeak people lead me on to expect I can write the rule for 1, 12, 42,
> > 92... but then when it comes time to make the balls actually appear
> > (as in POV-Ray, VRML, VPython, Panda3D or whatever), that suddenly I
> > have to switch to a different SmallTalk.
>
> Ah, I see. No you wouldn't do that. Once you'd learn a little more about
> the differences you'd give up the idea of switching between Smalltalk
> variants pretty quickly. They are way to different even in their
> syntactical aspects (just compare class definitions between VisualWorks
> and Squeak which are the closest two of the pack).

But I do need my spatial geometry, either as renderings (stills) or as
dynamic (like in Pygeo).

So my first question for Squeakers, after they show me how to generate
my sequences, is how do I convert this to vector-based graphics of a
spatial nature.  Does Squeakland provide those facilities.

Or do I need to start with VisualWorks in order to avoid switching
between Smalltalks down the road?

For more curriculum overview:

Slides from Europython 2005, Gothenburg:
http://www.4dsolutions.net/presentations/pythonicmath.pdf

with this background paper:
http://www.4dsolutions.net/presentations/urner_europython4.pdf

> > I realize Paul isn't just on edu-sig to answer my questions as a gnu
> > math teacher.  I just want to be clear that I'm (a) doing work in the
> > field and (b) have to remain at a practical level (I have real
> > students at Portland State).  PataPata doesn't solve any problem I
> > happen to be working on at the moment.
>
> Can't speak for the latter but I fully realize and value the former. In
> fact that's why I was asking to begin with - I'm always interested in
> feedback from people who are actively working in the field and your note
> sounded as if it might point to something that is relevant for us. What
> I'm taking away from the above is that we're probably doing a poor job
> in managing the expectations for what "Smalltalk" means. I'm not
> surprised, but it's a useful reminder about how people look at these terms.
>
> Cheers,
>    - Andreas

In terms of the Shuttleworth pipeline, as earlier proposed (URLs
shared), we start with:

(A) robotics and turtles (turtles a subclass of avatar i.e. animated doer),
(B) move to immersion mode in a Squeakland or other "world" phase,
(C) then move to a more adult-minded "under the hood" experience with Python,

with many forks in the road later.  Logo | Smalltalk | Python is
another way to describe the trajectory, though in practice it may not
be Logo or Smalltalk or Python.  These are delegates for the three
modes of practice (self controller, fantasy grower, real world
developer).

All these experiences become a foundation for later ones i.e.
controlling action figures, running immersive simulations, tackling
new challenges with only the stars to steer by (having gone through
these in childhood, we return as adults, and do it all again, but at
higher levels).

Kirby