excuse me!the examples run the course from windows to java to scripting languages and all have the code as well as an executable or it's equivalent provided, so how are the fruit basket demo's not language oriented?
this is one of the requirements of the demo's, and the code needs to be documented as to what does what, that is another requirement, and the code is for text box, list box, button and message box interactions, common and basic workings in coding.
so I don't see the validity of your points... inthane. For Blind Programming assistance, Information, Useful Programs, and Links to Jamal Mazrui's Text tutorial packages and Applications, visit me at:
To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 7:51 AM Subject: Re: Fruit basket program alternatives for Learnability
Hi Ken, Good point about Lua et al not being very good Fruit Basket langs since native GUis are harder to build. Which reminds me, as it stands now, the Fruit Basket is more an Exercise in GUi layout and basic controls rather than showing off a particular programming language, just as you said below. Especially in libs whose list boxes maintain the strings directly, you don't necessarily demonstrate any kind of array or hash usage, text processing, functional programming constructs or closures all of which are common elements in the dynamically typed scripting languages, for instance. So could a more involved, and possibly less graphical, version of the Fruit Basket be developed which is more akin to language comparisons? What if there's already a C version of WIn32, should there also be a C version of GTK+ 2, for instance, since it is a different lib with C bindings? Hello Worlds as in Wikipedia don't tell much about a language: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/List_of_hello_world_programs However, I saw a benchmark which tries to demonstrate that with just in time compiling and dynamic optimizations Java doesn't lose much at all to C, contrary to popular belief. Not sure how feasible the results are but: http://www.osnews.com/story.php/5602/Nine-Language-Performance-Round-up-Benchmarking-Math-and-File-IO//page1 Another interesting thing about that benchmark is the code. IT shows you basic arithmetic using integer and floating point types, file reading and writing and measuring the execution times of code. This can be a good intro to the field of the language i.e. basic data types, control structures, file I/O etc... which are things almost everyone wants to do sooner or later. Another set of language benchmarks would be this one, though not sure how the code is from a learnability point of view: http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/ -- With kind regards Veli-Pekka Tätilä (vtatila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) Accessibility, game music, synthesizers and programming: http://www.student.oulu.fi/~vtatila Ken Perry wrote:The problem with Haskell, LUA, and Objective Caml which are all languages I have thought of doing one in are they do not have an easy way to access the Win32 environment or some way to create a dialog type application. I keep them on the list of programs I will write one in but haven't got around to it because it is almost as much work as the one I wrote in LISP. If someone writes them first more power to them but what essentially these will end upbeing is direct calls to Win32 and a bit of the programming languages structure and syntax. When I came up with the Fruit Basket idea I didn't think of this kind oflanguage maybe we should come up with another test program that instead ofdisplaying a graphical interface does a lot of work like looping,conditionals, functions or methods, Not really to do anything important butto show what the language is like when using it.__________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
__________View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind