Subject:
|
Re: RIS 2.0 Problems
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Mon, 7 Mar 2005 06:12:13 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Steve Baker <sjbaker1@airmail.NOSPAMnet>
|
Viewed:
|
2484 times
|
| |
|
|
Thomas Johnson wrote:
> > RIS/Robolab is an educational dead-end. It leads nowhere
> > and the bad software design habits they engender may actually
> > have to be 'unlearned' before a child can learn the right
> > way to build computer programs.
>
> I take issue w/this statement on a number of levels. 1st, is the assumption
> that RIS/Robolab somehow leads to bad programing habits. Back this statement
> up!
Both use the tired old paradigm of branching around blocks of code more or
less at will. This is the way BASIC and FORTRAN have always approached
programming and it's well known and documented that those languages have to
be 'unlearned' (at some expense) in the process of learning modern languages.
Modern languages (except perhaps those produced specifically for quick-hack
scripting) universally use the 'structured programming' paradigm - which is
what NQC encourages.
Whilst it's certainly possible to write bad code in any language - it's
certainly better if you start people off the way you mean them to go on.
If a child learns programming in either of the Lego environments, they'll
certainly find it much harder to transition to languages like C, C++, Pascal,
Java, etc.
In contrast, if they've been working in NQC, they'll be able to start writing
C code without breaking stride and would not find Java, C#, Pascal or Python
at all hard to understand.
> While you can certainly show me some shoddy Robolab code, I can counter
> w/equally poor NCQ code.
You can write bad code in any language. However, the Robolab (and RIS)
environments positively encourage spaghetti programming.
> Any bad habits cannot be blamed on the programming environment.
I strongly disagree. Computer science has long realised that languages
like BASIC, Fortran and machine code are poor models for software development.
Look around - try to find modern programs that aren't written in 'C-like'
languages - they are VERY few and far between.
> 2nd is the "educational dead end" assertion. Many seem to think that the only
> "real" languages are text based. This is simply not true.
No - but I guarantee that 99.99% of all programs that your child is likely to
be working on in their early careers will be a text based language.
> Whether you typing
> words, writing ones and zeros or "drawing" a program, the concepts are the same.
No. Structured programs, data structures, all of those things are the
cornerstones of modern programming. People just don't use flow charts or
machine code anymore - and that's what RIS and Robocode are teaching.
> Furthermore, should any of these kids pursue engineering, they are extremely
> likely to encounter LabVIEW, the basis of Robolab.
I don't think so. I've been in software engineering my entire life and I've
yet to encounter any use of it in any serious application. That's not to say
that it's not used - but it's down in the tiny minority of projects in the
world.
> Now, having said that, NQC would be fine addition to FLL.
Good.
---------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------
HomeEmail: <sjbaker1@airmail.net> WorkEmail: <sjbaker@link.com>
HomePage : http://www.sjbaker.org
Projects : http://plib.sf.net http://tuxaqfh.sf.net
http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
GCS d-- s:+ a+ C++++$ UL+++$ P--- L++++$ E--- W+++ N o+ K? w--- !O M-
V-- PS++ PE- Y-- PGP-- t+ 5 X R+++ tv b++ DI++ D G+ e++ h--(-) r+++ y++++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: RIS 2.0 Problems
|
| Steve, I stand by my statements. Robolab does not encourage poor programing practice. Neither does NQC encourage it. These tools are neutral and can be used well or not. Further, Robolab skills become LabVIEW skills--skills that are often required (...) (20 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: RIS 2.0 Problems
|
| (...) the same. (...) I'm going to disagree with this one statement, and this one statement only. I've been working in the business world creating software for almost 20 years, and I use flowcharts, and their conceptual children, all the time. While (...) (20 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: RIS & FLL
|
| Does anyone know what "Mindscript" is? I assume most people in this discussion don't know what it is, or that it IS allowed in FLL events. From the 2003 rules (unchanged in '04): (URL) ALLOWABLE SOFTWARE The Robot must be programmed using LEGO (...) (20 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: RIS 2.0 Problems
|
| (...) Welcome to the religious war of the 1970s. Honestly, no ALGOL-derived language (Pascal, C, etc) with or without Smalltalk-inspired OO extensions (C++, Java, C#) can be called a modern language. True, some of them have been built recently, but (...) (20 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: RIS 2.0 Problems
|
| (...) I take issue w/this statement on a number of levels. 1st, is the assumption that RIS/Robolab somehow leads to bad programing habits. Back this statement up! While you can certainly show me some shoddy Robolab code, I can counter w/equally poor (...) (20 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
114 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
