RE: Scratch

["Daniel Ajoy" <da.ajoy@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 24 May 2007 at 9:14, Ray Catzel wrote:

> I do not know what you are referring to in "power/text-editing  vs
> basic-concepts-understanding/mouse-drags". 

Here is a procedure I received through email from one
of our students:

to kitten
if kitten reaches black announce (kittens rule)
if kitte reaches red announce (kittens rock)
end


This procure produces the error message:

Out of Space in kitten


In Scratch this procedure would not have been able to be
constructed, because its syntax is invalid. The student
would have had immediate feedback as to what syntax was
the correct one. Invalid sytanxes simply can't be coupled
into a procedure.

Scratch would be even more constructivist that Logo in 
this sense.

Students wouldn't need to be thought the syntax of the
language, they would just have to explore it.

Here another example:


to mix
launch [t2, repeat 360 [fd 1 rt 1]
t1, repeat 360 [fd 1 lt 1]]
tto [t3 pea] repeat 2 [repeat 360 [fd 1 rt 1]  wait 4 repeat 180 [fd 2 rt 1]
mix
end

this one produces 

missing ] in mix

Scratch would force "good indentantion" conventions.


here is another example:

if [colorunder = 114 [launch page4]]


I think the "power of text" is that it is portable, code can
be copied, published in printed materials, published easily
on the web, generated automatically, typed rapidly.

The problem of mouse-drags is that it is slow. and...

I prefer using the keyboard but after 20 years of having
to use both keyboard and mouse, my wrist does hurt a bit if 
I have to intensively use software that does not provide 
keyboard shortcuts.


Daniel