*blink* That's neat

[Arthur Siegel]

Martin writes:

>Note that I'm not questioning
the
>Alice result on
case-sensitivity;
>I'm sure case-sensitivity
confused
>beginners. It's just that the
Alice
>result is not the whole
picture; there
>is the consistency of
spelling
>argument, and the desire for
certain
>idioms that make use of case,
for
>instance.

Isn't the question not the
Alice results,
but the relevancy of those
results.

Is it reasonable to believe
that results
achieved in the context of the
usability of a
VR system are relevant to CP4E
in any meaningful way?

Someone like myself is not in
a position to
argue that there is nothing to
programming
language as interface.  I use
Python because
it is an 'interface' I can
handle, as opposed
to C, which is an 'interface'
I cannot.

But in handling Python as a
programming language - not
as a instruction set to a VR
system - case is a
minor issue.

VR, on the other hand, is
uniquely about HCI, and in
unique ways.

And VR has been the stated
area of interest of the
Alice project since its
inception - some eight years
ago,
I believe.

Is the confusion purely mine?

Might the Alice project folks
contribute to the discussion?

Do they agree that their
studies or their software are
more
than tangentially relevant to
the goals of CP4E? I have yet
to see
anything that indicates that
they do?

Sometimes scientific inquiry
leads to conclusions that defy
common sense.

Until some Sir Eddington
confirms, I am going to assume
not here.