Looking for ugly code comparisons WAS: Slashdotter looking for kids' programming language

[viktoras didziulis]

Dave Cragg wrote:
>
> I'll play Devil's Advocate.
>
> There seems to be some assumptions about what is easier for a child. 
> One of these assumptions is that a "simple English-like syntax" is 
> simpler than other kinds of syntax. I wonder if that is not an adult 
> prejudice.
>
> Compare these two ways of representing properties:
>
> the text of me
> me.text


I should agree with Dave's point. Especially in countries, where English 
is not native language like Lithuania and Bulgaria ;-) or take the major 
part of Europe, where kids do not speak English yet, the assumption that 
English like language is easier to learn as a programming language is 
wrong. It might be true if it were Lithuanian-like, Polish-like, 
Russian-like, Czech-like, Finish-like, Bulgarian-like, Georgian-like or 
Chinese-like (outside Europe) though.

On the other, learning Revolution might help kids learn some English. 
That's a good point!

What we were taught at school was Fokal (sounds bad, and I doubt anyone 
on this list has heard anything about this :-) ), later Pascal, but as 
far as at that time PC was a very rare thing outside the school, I 
practiced most concepts of programming by writing programs for a 
programmable calculator MK-52 (likely not known outside the former ussr) 
and the language was somehow similar to assembly - sets of instructions, 
pushing and popping numbers from stack (memory, nothing in common with 
Revolution stacks), registers. So those who proposed assembly might well 
be right as well.. At the university we were taught Pascal/Delphi. Life 
forced to learn HTML/Javascript and finally Revolution RAD was a real 
discovery, but at that point I was not a kid anymore!.. So if kid is 
motivated to learn programming he will learn anything he has an easy 
access to.

So the question would be - do kids have easy access to Revolution ? 
Depends on their parents :-)..

Best regards!
Viktoras