What is different with Python ?

[Claudio Grondi]

>> there is a 1% of people extremely interested in turning
>> on or off a pixel
I taught "adults" aged from 16 to 86 for some years
a course "Introduction to data processing", where I had
tried to teach the basics beginning with switching light
on and off. Having around twenty participants I
experienced from time to time one or two who found
it fascinating, so the 1% is in my eyes a good guess.

> 40x50. Probably nowdays unless you show them an antialiased
> texture mapped 3D floating torus with their name and
> face on it in live video they'll prefer exchanging
> stupid messages with the mobile phone instead.
The ability of making a video (I currently experience
a run towards "equipping" videos from camcorders
showing the involved teenager fighting using ordinary
sticks with StarWars laser sword effects) when equipped
with appropriate software tool is given now even to the
not gifted 99%. After the videos are done by the a little
bit smarter ones of the entire group, it doesn't whetting
the apetite for more programming skills - it creates
traffic on ICQ and Internet by exchanging the
videos and the opinions if they are cool or not.

> If it's about the time it will take to get a rotating
> 3d torus with live video on it I know for sure that most
> of the programmers I know that started from high level
> will probably *never* reach that point.
Many consider such skills as not worth to achieve,
looking for a solution to eventually raising problems
in a better computer hardware and new software
tools in case of timing problems.
Generally it appears to me, that it is true that many of
current teenagers look for authorities not for own experience
(this is nothing new) and that they perceive the world around
them through the window of the Internet browser not through
the window of the room (this is what makes the difference
compared to past time). But the current world they experience
is so different from what it was twenty years ago, that it
is today sure possible to start on a very high level and
stay there all the life never beeing able to go down to
the details without having therefore serious disadvantages
as a programmer. I experienced beeing very surprised
myself, that it is even possible to be hired as a programmer
having an IQ below the level of around 80.

I am personally biased towards trying to understand
anything as deep as possible and in the past was quite
certain, that one can not achieve good results
without a deep insight into the underlying details.
I have now to admit, that I was just wrong. From my
overall experience I infer, that it is not only possible
but has sometimes even better chances for success,
because one is not overloaded with the ballast of deep
understanding which can not only be useful but also
hinder from fast progress.

Claudio

"Andrea Griffini" <agriff at tin.it> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:ofc5b1plbui6n61qpr9iv421ranugbq82q at 4ax.com...
> On 17 Jun 2005 01:25:29 -0700, "Michele Simionato"
> <michele.simionato at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I don't think anything significant changed in the percentages.
>
> Then why starting from
>
>     print "Hello world"
>
> that can't be explained (to say better it can't be
> *really* understood) without introducing a huge
> amount of magic and not from a simple 8 bit CPU
> instead ? What are the pluses of the start-from-high-level
> approach ? If one is to avoid bordeom I don't agree
> as assembler is all but boring (when you start),
> or at least this was what *I* experienced.
>
> If it's about the time it will take to get a rotating
> 3d torus with live video on it I know for sure that most
> of the programmers I know that started from high level
> will probably *never* reach that point. Surely if
> you start say from pull-down menus they'll be able to
> do pull down menus. And IMO there are good chances
> they'll stay there lifetime.
>
> So is python the good first programming language ?
> IMO not at all if you wanna become a programmer; it
> hides too much and that hidden stuff will bite back
> badly. Unless you know what is behind python it will
> be almost impossible for you to remember and avoid
> all the traps. Buf if you need to know what is behind
> it then it's better to learn that stuff first, because
> it's more concrete and simpler from a logical point
> of view; the constructions are complex but (because)
> the bricks are simpler.
>
> But it probably all boils down to what is a programmer.
>
> Is C++ a good first programming language ?
>
> BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :D
>
> But apparently some guru I greatly respect thinks so
> (I'm not kidding, http://www.spellen.org/youcandoit/).
>
> Andrea