6 ms·

Is Python The New Basic? ("Python For Kids")

49 points by modernise 14y ago

olaf 14y ago
Javascript is.
- Turing_Machine 14y ago
  Agree 100%. You don't have to install anything. It's on every machine with a modern web browser, even mobile devices. It's even got the "nastiness" factor down. :-) We're also starting to see things like Snap written in pure JavaScript/HTML5: http://snap.berkeley.edu/snapsource/snap.html http://snap.berkeley.edu/snapsource/snap.html
  - olaf 14y ago
    Not to forget the rapid evolution of the language, ECMAScript 6 will get ... 1. classes http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:classes http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:classes 2. modules http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:modules http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:modules and more (http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proposals http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proposals).
    - dangayle 14y ago
      Javascript doesn't even need classes as a prototype-based (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype-based_programming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype-based_programming) language. I get the feeling that because Javascript is in such high demand, a lot of "classicly trained" programmers have started taking it up and started b*tching about how things aren't they way they're used to. That's probably the same group of people who on this board complain about Python's indentation syntax, etc.
      - Evbn 14y ago
        Prototypes aren't classes and they aren't always what you want, and conventions can't always be optimized by the compiler as well as structured language elements.
- the_mitsuhiko 14y ago
  I agree strongly with that. It's easier to use, solves the deployment problem and does not even force the concept of objects onto a newcomer.
- ufo 14y ago
  The problem with Javascript is that you basically can only use it to interact with websites (thus forcing people to also learn HTML and CSS along with it). There is also the problem of it being a language full of warts and implementation incompatibilities and missing lots of features you would want from a modern language.
  - Jare 14y ago
    BASIC had plenty such warts, incompatibilities and lack of 'modern' features. Javascript is still not as immediately available and direct to use as the BASICs of old were. As a beginner, to easily make anything useful and interesting (by today's standards) in Javascript, you need to run it in a browser as a saved file, wrap it in some html, and add a bunch of boilerplate (create a canvas, make stuff move, access the DOM).
  - mwill 14y ago
    JavaScript w/Nodejs is pretty great. I'm pretty language agnostic, but I'll admit I've briefly fantasized about an ECMAScriptish language that shared all it's feature, down to the object model, weird hybrid half FP/OO and prototypical inheritance, etc, plus some of the propose features and other cool junk like clean macro support, operator overloading, etc, and squared up some of the crazier stuff like weird definitions of truthiness, and looser type coercion. Throw in a way to set up bindings, GUI toolkit or whatever, and a way to build distributable standalone binaries, and I'd use that as my go to language, esp to prototype and hack out ideas. It's a fun way to just dump ideas and a few changes would make it a great all-round language worth favouring.
mhd 14y ago
Nothing is, that's the problem.
- blablabla123 14y ago
  Yes... At least for non-technical people. Last year I did a small project with Excel/VBA and I realized VBA is even more difficult than C#. String manipulation is overly complex and nearly everything seems really difficult.
darkstalker 14y ago
I'd rather take Lua as "The new Basic", since it has a syntax closer to Basic, and it's a simpler language.
- rolleiflex 14y ago
  I concur. From my limited experience with Lua, I'd say it's a very beginner friendly language, and it's blazing fast in certain conditions. There's also an app called Codea which runs on iPad that allows beginners to code games within. It works suprisingly well, and there are a few games on the app store that are written entirely on iPad in Codea.
- andrewflnr 14y ago
  I don't fully understand why Lua hasn't taken over the world. Seems that a large part of it is a sort of weak ecosystem (maybe larger than it seems, but too spread out), and maybe the table thing weirds people out. People want to learn something they can use in "real life" as soon as possible, at least in my experience. But if Lua had taken over that wouldn't be a problem. Grrr.
  - extension 14y ago
    No standard library, nor even a standard class/object model. Lua is more of a language engine than a complete language. In that capacity, it is quite a success.
luxxx 14y ago
I didn't realize there were people who still didn't know that. Python is a language for people who don't program, and want to call themselves programmers but don't actually want to be a programmer.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
sonabinu 14y ago
I started with BASIC when in school and now I am in the process of introducing Python to my 11 year old. Anything that makes learning fun will gets kids to try out something new! Last summer together we did codeacademy's introduction to Python. This site has a list of books and online resources for just the purpose http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=6220 http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=6...
RodgerTheGreat 14y ago
For someone who already knows how to program, Python seems to be very easy to pick up. It's still a tremendously more complex language than BASIC. I help teach an after-school programming class for middle schoolers. Last year, we tried using Python. While some students got the hang of it, many seemed confused and demotivated. This year, I wrote a simple TinyBASIC REPL from scratch[1], aiming to produce the simplest subset of the language that made it possible to do interesting things and illustrate concepts like looping, branching, variables, etc. It was a big hit with the kids, and the whole class has been extremely engaged. As a next step, I've built a Logo[2] implementation so that we can move into writing modular, reusable procedures and play with graphics. Learning to program is almost entirely orthogonal to learning a language, and I think that starting with very small "toy" languages is a good way to approach teaching core concepts without getting lost in the quirks and complex features of popular "real" languages. BASIC is small, Python will never be. [1]https://github.com/JohnEarnest/Mako/tree/master/demos/Masica [2]https://github.com/JohnEarnest/Mako/tree/master/demos/Loko
- sown 14y ago
  >I've built a Logo[2] implementation so that we can move into writing modular, reusable procedures and play with graphics. I've always felt that it's hard to go against Logo. When I was a kid, there was a direct connection between what I did on the keyboard and what the turtle would do. That language changes your brain, not your data. Thus, it is one of the most important languages.
- modernise 14y ago
  Remember those laptops for African kids? They integrated Python for learning to program. I only watched the video, back then, but I remember them showing the Python console. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Laptop_per_Child Pippy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7aQxYuKJ18 Turtle Art https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2MblcmwWo8
  - RodgerTheGreat 14y ago
    Interestingly, OLPCs also come preloaded with a Forth environment by virtue of the fact that they use OpenFirmware: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/FORTH http://wiki.laptop.org/go/FORTH
prezjordan 14y ago
I wish SmallBASIC (there are two of them! [0] [1]) would catch on (become a household name). Very easy, approachable, and has the same charm as normal BASIC/QBASIC - with regards to the development environment. Perfect for children. [0]: http://smallbasic.com/ http://smallbasic.com/ (Microsoft SmallBASIC) [1]: http://smallbasic.sourceforge.net/ http://smallbasic.sourceforge.net/ (SmallBASIC - One more basic)
- rbanffy 14y ago
  It's still way beyond 8-bit BASIC. I think the BASIC interpreters that ran on small home computers of the late 70's and early 80's were in a sweet spot between being high-level languages (variable names, strings, arrays) and being close enough to the metal to illustrate things like conditional branching (no multi-line IF's demanded the use of GOTO's for conditional branches).
chris123 14y ago
These days, it seems that when I ask great 20-something-year-old programmers (or whatever term we use) at what age they started to program computers, I the answer is usually 10+. I wonder if it will be the same in 20 years? How young will it go?
- Evbn 14y ago
  It was the same 10 years ago. Presumably it will be as low as it was when programmable computers were first deployed to homes with kids. It might get older if kids get too much video games that don't inspire them to program the machine.
ConstantineXVI 14y ago
The one key difference between BASIC and (python lua javascript & etc) has nothing to do with the language at all: modern computers don't boot straight in to a REPL. Anyone who used a C64 more than likely knows a little BASIC, can't say the same for naive Windows or Mac users.
- olaf 14y ago
  Maybe the modern equivalent of "boot straight in to a REPL." is starting a browser, everybody and his grandma knows how to do that, and if that is done, Javascript is closer than any other programming language. I can imagine a default, browser based Javascript REPL just being one mouseclick away. that can be done and probably will be done sooner or later.
  - ConstantineXVI 14y ago
    > browser based Javascript REPL Cmd-Opt-J[0]. While easy to get to, it's not the same as being forced into a REPL every time you use your computer; you still have to know it's there, lessening the temptation to jump right in and break things. [0] or insert browser/platform appropriate shortcut for JS console/debugger here
    - Evbn 14y ago
      My PC booted to DOS. Basic was an installed program. My apple booted to the program on the disk you inserted.
- teilo 14y ago
  Agreed. Tandy Color Computer 2 for me (with Extended Basic ROM upgrade - Oh Joy!), but same deal. Natural transition from there to QuickBasic (not QBasic!) running on a 386SX and the world of compilers and runtimes. Between QuickBasic and Python there was a blur of other languages which I have mostly forgotten. But were it now for the REPL, I would likely not be a programmer today.
naner 14y ago
There is no new Basic. Computers are massively more complex now and expectations have changed as well with the Internet and tablets and smart phones being what they are. Most first-world kids would be bored out of their minds with Basic. But Python is a fine programming language for beginners. A Raspberry-pi would be another good teaching tool. Processing might be interesting to some kids as well... But there is no new Basic, no new Logo, no new Oregon Trail, no new Math Blasters. Those things belong to a different era.
klrr 14y ago
I tried it as "first language" and it's a freaking pain, I still don't understand the "everything is an object" stuff and why to use modules for everything instead of solving problems with your own code. BASIC is way better for beginner's, especially kids.
- volaski 14y ago
  1. If you think Python is a pain, I don't think there is any other language you can learn. I've learned lots of different languages, but Python was one of the easiest to pick up and get started--not so different from BASIC. 2. Unless things have changed since I last worked with python, your statement "Everything is an object" is not true. Actually this is one thing I like about Python over Ruby (In Ruby, everything actually is an object.) As far as I know, Python has primitives, and therefore not as confusing as ruby for beginners. 3. Here's a problem: "Build a program that fetches content from a web page.". Try building that without using any modules. Maybe even try that with your BASIC if you want. By using modules you just reuse what people have already built, and can solve aforementioned problem with just a couple of lines.
  - int_19h 14y ago
    Python primitive types are also objects. It's been that way for many years.
  - klrr 14y ago
    I get your point, but why should you even bother using modules when you are trying to learn programming? The scenario you suggests isen't a task for a beginner, especially not a kid with no experience. Anyway, I just want to say a quick apology, I relize my first post sounded a bit more aggresive than intended, sorry about that.
    - Jach 14y ago
      What sorts of problems and modules did you have in mind? Sure some modules can spoil the learning fun of the problem, but in most cases they seem to enhance it. Implementing the sqrt function is interesting to me (and in fact it's done early on in the SICP book for college freshmen), I also think it's interesting how other math functions can be implemented, but would you want kids who may not even have a solid grasp of what a logarithm is to implement the log function? How about making a 2D game? Why wouldn't you use PyGame?
pav3l 14y ago
The biggest reason BASIC was popular to teach back in the day, is because it is very simple. You are allowed to use GOTO statements which will make (bad) programming a whole lot easier for absolute beginners. On the other hand Python is a well-designed language. It encourages both OOP and FP, and honestly I am not convinced that just because smart people are actively pushing Python to become "the next BASIC", it is going to be very interesting for absolute beginners with little exposure to math and logic.
- zobzu 14y ago
  To iterate on what you said: Because it was simple and the rest was very complex. In fact, only assembly language for some CPUs was as simple as basic (now, it's not really the case anymore, although asm basics are simple, stuff often gets complicated with special registers and special opcodes doing magic) Many languages today as simple and relatively sane, like, say "python" ;-) (now the other reason why I like python is because while you don't feel limited with it, it _forces_ people to code half readable, half decent stuff. They got a good balance)
mememememememe 14y ago
I am old, but I still prefer to teach C++ in the intro course. I learned the hard way and it pays off. "What? I have to do this in C++? I can just import that in Python!" and then they really don't understand how things work under that magic. C/C++ programmers would say "oh that's magic! i like that magic :) "
hiroprot 14y ago
Where I went to school, they taught Turbo Pascal as the first language, and I thought it was a much better beginner language than Basic.

49 points by modernise 14y ago

olaf 14y ago

Javascript is.

Turing_Machine 14y ago
Agree 100%. You don't have to install anything. It's on every machine with a modern web browser, even mobile devices. It's even got the "nastiness" factor down. :-) We're also starting to see things like Snap written in pure JavaScript/HTML5: http://snap.berkeley.edu/snapsource/snap.html http://snap.berkeley.edu/snapsource/snap.html
- olaf 14y ago
  Not to forget the rapid evolution of the language, ECMAScript 6 will get ... 1. classes http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:classes http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:classes 2. modules http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:modules http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:modules and more (http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proposals http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:proposals).
  - dangayle 14y ago
    Javascript doesn't even need classes as a prototype-based (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype-based_programming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype-based_programming) language. I get the feeling that because Javascript is in such high demand, a lot of "classicly trained" programmers have started taking it up and started b*tching about how things aren't they way they're used to. That's probably the same group of people who on this board complain about Python's indentation syntax, etc.
    - Evbn 14y ago
      Prototypes aren't classes and they aren't always what you want, and conventions can't always be optimized by the compiler as well as structured language elements.
the_mitsuhiko 14y ago
I agree strongly with that. It's easier to use, solves the deployment problem and does not even force the concept of objects onto a newcomer.
ufo 14y ago
The problem with Javascript is that you basically can only use it to interact with websites (thus forcing people to also learn HTML and CSS along with it). There is also the problem of it being a language full of warts and implementation incompatibilities and missing lots of features you would want from a modern language.
- Jare 14y ago
  BASIC had plenty such warts, incompatibilities and lack of 'modern' features. Javascript is still not as immediately available and direct to use as the BASICs of old were. As a beginner, to easily make anything useful and interesting (by today's standards) in Javascript, you need to run it in a browser as a saved file, wrap it in some html, and add a bunch of boilerplate (create a canvas, make stuff move, access the DOM).
- mwill 14y ago
  JavaScript w/Nodejs is pretty great. I'm pretty language agnostic, but I'll admit I've briefly fantasized about an ECMAScriptish language that shared all it's feature, down to the object model, weird hybrid half FP/OO and prototypical inheritance, etc, plus some of the propose features and other cool junk like clean macro support, operator overloading, etc, and squared up some of the crazier stuff like weird definitions of truthiness, and looser type coercion. Throw in a way to set up bindings, GUI toolkit or whatever, and a way to build distributable standalone binaries, and I'd use that as my go to language, esp to prototype and hack out ideas. It's a fun way to just dump ideas and a few changes would make it a great all-round language worth favouring.

mhd 14y ago

Nothing is, that's the problem.

blablabla123 14y ago
Yes... At least for non-technical people. Last year I did a small project with Excel/VBA and I realized VBA is even more difficult than C#. String manipulation is overly complex and nearly everything seems really difficult.

darkstalker 14y ago

I'd rather take Lua as "The new Basic", since it has a syntax closer to Basic, and it's a simpler language.

rolleiflex 14y ago
I concur. From my limited experience with Lua, I'd say it's a very beginner friendly language, and it's blazing fast in certain conditions. There's also an app called Codea which runs on iPad that allows beginners to code games within. It works suprisingly well, and there are a few games on the app store that are written entirely on iPad in Codea.
andrewflnr 14y ago
I don't fully understand why Lua hasn't taken over the world. Seems that a large part of it is a sort of weak ecosystem (maybe larger than it seems, but too spread out), and maybe the table thing weirds people out. People want to learn something they can use in "real life" as soon as possible, at least in my experience. But if Lua had taken over that wouldn't be a problem. Grrr.
- extension 14y ago
  No standard library, nor even a standard class/object model. Lua is more of a language engine than a complete language. In that capacity, it is quite a success.

luxxx 14y ago

I didn't realize there were people who still didn't know that. Python is a language for people who don't program, and want to call themselves programmers but don't actually want to be a programmer.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

sonabinu 14y ago

I started with BASIC when in school and now I am in the process of introducing Python to my 11 year old. Anything that makes learning fun will gets kids to try out something new! Last summer together we did codeacademy's introduction to Python. This site has a list of books and online resources for just the purpose http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=6220 http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=6...

RodgerTheGreat 14y ago

For someone who already knows how to program, Python seems to be very easy to pick up. It's still a tremendously more complex language than BASIC. I help teach an after-school programming class for middle schoolers. Last year, we tried using Python. While some students got the hang of it, many seemed confused and demotivated. This year, I wrote a simple TinyBASIC REPL from scratch[1], aiming to produce the simplest subset of the language that made it possible to do interesting things and illustrate concepts like looping, branching, variables, etc. It was a big hit with the kids, and the whole class has been extremely engaged. As a next step, I've built a Logo[2] implementation so that we can move into writing modular, reusable procedures and play with graphics. Learning to program is almost entirely orthogonal to learning a language, and I think that starting with very small "toy" languages is a good way to approach teaching core concepts without getting lost in the quirks and complex features of popular "real" languages. BASIC is small, Python will never be. [1]https://github.com/JohnEarnest/Mako/tree/master/demos/Masica [2]https://github.com/JohnEarnest/Mako/tree/master/demos/Loko

sown 14y ago
>I've built a Logo[2] implementation so that we can move into writing modular, reusable procedures and play with graphics. I've always felt that it's hard to go against Logo. When I was a kid, there was a direct connection between what I did on the keyboard and what the turtle would do. That language changes your brain, not your data. Thus, it is one of the most important languages.
modernise 14y ago
Remember those laptops for African kids? They integrated Python for learning to program. I only watched the video, back then, but I remember them showing the Python console. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Laptop_per_Child Pippy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7aQxYuKJ18 Turtle Art https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2MblcmwWo8
- RodgerTheGreat 14y ago
  Interestingly, OLPCs also come preloaded with a Forth environment by virtue of the fact that they use OpenFirmware: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/FORTH http://wiki.laptop.org/go/FORTH

prezjordan 14y ago

I wish SmallBASIC (there are two of them! [0] [1]) would catch on (become a household name). Very easy, approachable, and has the same charm as normal BASIC/QBASIC - with regards to the development environment. Perfect for children. [0]: http://smallbasic.com/ http://smallbasic.com/ (Microsoft SmallBASIC) [1]: http://smallbasic.sourceforge.net/ http://smallbasic.sourceforge.net/ (SmallBASIC - One more basic)

rbanffy 14y ago
It's still way beyond 8-bit BASIC. I think the BASIC interpreters that ran on small home computers of the late 70's and early 80's were in a sweet spot between being high-level languages (variable names, strings, arrays) and being close enough to the metal to illustrate things like conditional branching (no multi-line IF's demanded the use of GOTO's for conditional branches).

chris123 14y ago

These days, it seems that when I ask great 20-something-year-old programmers (or whatever term we use) at what age they started to program computers, I the answer is usually 10+. I wonder if it will be the same in 20 years? How young will it go?

Evbn 14y ago
It was the same 10 years ago. Presumably it will be as low as it was when programmable computers were first deployed to homes with kids. It might get older if kids get too much video games that don't inspire them to program the machine.

ConstantineXVI 14y ago

The one key difference between BASIC and (python lua javascript & etc) has nothing to do with the language at all: modern computers don't boot straight in to a REPL. Anyone who used a C64 more than likely knows a little BASIC, can't say the same for naive Windows or Mac users.

olaf 14y ago
Maybe the modern equivalent of "boot straight in to a REPL." is starting a browser, everybody and his grandma knows how to do that, and if that is done, Javascript is closer than any other programming language. I can imagine a default, browser based Javascript REPL just being one mouseclick away. that can be done and probably will be done sooner or later.
- ConstantineXVI 14y ago
  > browser based Javascript REPL Cmd-Opt-J[0]. While easy to get to, it's not the same as being forced into a REPL every time you use your computer; you still have to know it's there, lessening the temptation to jump right in and break things. [0] or insert browser/platform appropriate shortcut for JS console/debugger here
  - Evbn 14y ago
    My PC booted to DOS. Basic was an installed program. My apple booted to the program on the disk you inserted.
teilo 14y ago
Agreed. Tandy Color Computer 2 for me (with Extended Basic ROM upgrade - Oh Joy!), but same deal. Natural transition from there to QuickBasic (not QBasic!) running on a 386SX and the world of compilers and runtimes. Between QuickBasic and Python there was a blur of other languages which I have mostly forgotten. But were it now for the REPL, I would likely not be a programmer today.

naner 14y ago

There is no new Basic. Computers are massively more complex now and expectations have changed as well with the Internet and tablets and smart phones being what they are. Most first-world kids would be bored out of their minds with Basic. But Python is a fine programming language for beginners. A Raspberry-pi would be another good teaching tool. Processing might be interesting to some kids as well... But there is no new Basic, no new Logo, no new Oregon Trail, no new Math Blasters. Those things belong to a different era.

klrr 14y ago

I tried it as "first language" and it's a freaking pain, I still don't understand the "everything is an object" stuff and why to use modules for everything instead of solving problems with your own code. BASIC is way better for beginner's, especially kids.

volaski 14y ago
1. If you think Python is a pain, I don't think there is any other language you can learn. I've learned lots of different languages, but Python was one of the easiest to pick up and get started--not so different from BASIC. 2. Unless things have changed since I last worked with python, your statement "Everything is an object" is not true. Actually this is one thing I like about Python over Ruby (In Ruby, everything actually is an object.) As far as I know, Python has primitives, and therefore not as confusing as ruby for beginners. 3. Here's a problem: "Build a program that fetches content from a web page.". Try building that without using any modules. Maybe even try that with your BASIC if you want. By using modules you just reuse what people have already built, and can solve aforementioned problem with just a couple of lines.
- int_19h 14y ago
  Python primitive types are also objects. It's been that way for many years.
- klrr 14y ago
  I get your point, but why should you even bother using modules when you are trying to learn programming? The scenario you suggests isen't a task for a beginner, especially not a kid with no experience. Anyway, I just want to say a quick apology, I relize my first post sounded a bit more aggresive than intended, sorry about that.
  - Jach 14y ago
    What sorts of problems and modules did you have in mind? Sure some modules can spoil the learning fun of the problem, but in most cases they seem to enhance it. Implementing the sqrt function is interesting to me (and in fact it's done early on in the SICP book for college freshmen), I also think it's interesting how other math functions can be implemented, but would you want kids who may not even have a solid grasp of what a logarithm is to implement the log function? How about making a 2D game? Why wouldn't you use PyGame?

pav3l 14y ago

The biggest reason BASIC was popular to teach back in the day, is because it is very simple. You are allowed to use GOTO statements which will make (bad) programming a whole lot easier for absolute beginners. On the other hand Python is a well-designed language. It encourages both OOP and FP, and honestly I am not convinced that just because smart people are actively pushing Python to become "the next BASIC", it is going to be very interesting for absolute beginners with little exposure to math and logic.

zobzu 14y ago
To iterate on what you said: Because it was simple and the rest was very complex. In fact, only assembly language for some CPUs was as simple as basic (now, it's not really the case anymore, although asm basics are simple, stuff often gets complicated with special registers and special opcodes doing magic) Many languages today as simple and relatively sane, like, say "python" ;-) (now the other reason why I like python is because while you don't feel limited with it, it _forces_ people to code half readable, half decent stuff. They got a good balance)

mememememememe 14y ago

I am old, but I still prefer to teach C++ in the intro course. I learned the hard way and it pays off. "What? I have to do this in C++? I can just import that in Python!" and then they really don't understand how things work under that magic. C/C++ programmers would say "oh that's magic! i like that magic :) "

hiroprot 14y ago

Where I went to school, they taught Turbo Pascal as the first language, and I thought it was a much better beginner language than Basic.