Live data from Hacker News

Why I Believe Scratch Is the Future of Programming

elearningindustry.com

11–20 of 65 posts

Re: Why I Believe Scratch Is the Future of Programming

#11
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I too don't see Scratch as the future of programming but you have to grant that it gets kids interested in programming.

Honestly I think Scratch has as high learning curve as simple programming languages like python or ruby (maybe even higher learning curve), not to mention all the copy-and-paste-able code available online if you learn languages like python (compared to this format which is obscure and not easily shareable). That's why I said if I was teaching my kid to code I would teach python. It's easier to learn, copy and paste (…

"Honestly I think Scratch has as high learning curve as simple programming languages like python or ruby"

No. Simply no.

Source: Taught First/Second/Third graders scratch once a week for 2 full years. The no syntax (no writing) part is extremely important. I've seen first graders completely crate a game from scratch (no pun) that I and other adults actually enjoyed playing as an honest to goodness challenging game. There's absolutely no comparison with "grown up" programming languages... even BASIC (that I myself programmed as a kid but that was only in middle school and later).

Re: Why I Believe Scratch Is the Future of Programming

#12
Unreal Engine's scripting language called Blueprints - https://docs.unrealengine.com/latest/INT/Engine/Blueprints/. It's pretty cool and useful - you can make everything in Blueprints that you can in C++ in UE (10% slower than pure C++ code).

However there are some problems. If you have too many nodes in a script it's very hard to navigate and understand what's going on. So I'd say that there's place for both, because it's easier for quick prototyping, but I don't think it'll ever replace programming to that extent. It's just another tool for the toolbox.

Re: Why I Believe Scratch Is the Future of Programming

#14

The future of programming is programming. What's described in the article is indeed true, you can build stuff without syntax, you can extend it, etc. But who is this for? I am not a fan of the "Let's teach everyone to code" rhetoric, because this is same as "let's teach everyone to play the piano", or "Let's teach everyone to be good at math!". People who will code will code even if you don't push them to. And most o…

I think the world would be a much better place if we exchanged "everyone learns to code" with "everyone learns safe and secure computer practices". That doesn't have the same ring to it but it's more important. Let's learn now to not open malware attachments before learning an if loop.

Re: Why I Believe Scratch Is the Future of Programming

#15

The future of programming is programming. What's described in the article is indeed true, you can build stuff without syntax, you can extend it, etc. But who is this for? I am not a fan of the "Let's teach everyone to code" rhetoric, because this is same as "let's teach everyone to play the piano", or "Let's teach everyone to be good at math!". People who will code will code even if you don't push them to. And most o…

I think the world would be a much better place if we exchanged "everyone learns to code" with "everyone learns safe and secure computer practices". That doesn't have the same ring to it but it's more important. Let's learn now to not open malware attachments before learning an if loop.

Re: Why I Believe Scratch Is the Future of Programming

#16

The future of programming is programming. What's described in the article is indeed true, you can build stuff without syntax, you can extend it, etc. But who is this for? I am not a fan of the "Let's teach everyone to code" rhetoric, because this is same as "let's teach everyone to play the piano", or "Let's teach everyone to be good at math!". People who will code will code even if you don't push them to. And most o…

Arguing that people who don't already code shouldn't code assumes people make perfectly informed career choices based on their pre-determined personal traits.

I strongly recommend reading Dweck's work on mindsets to dissuade you of the belief that aptitude for things like Mathematics is a fixed trait rather than something that can be changed.

I think it's also helpful to recognise that the group that are exposed to programming under the right conditions to start of their own accord are a subset (I would posit a small subset) of the people who would be an asset to the industry.

Re: Why I Believe Scratch Is the Future of Programming

#19
We demo'd a software called filebound earlier this year when looking at a document management solution and it left a hell of an impression on me.

Most business systems are built off of the concept of the "enterprise infrastructure" being the printing press for the front end infrastructure, and the back office being the back end infrastructure. When the Xerox printer was first introduced, you had a "rapid prototyping" system for business processes inwhich the xerox machine represented the front end and back office being the back end.

The "Next Gen" of business systems and processes was computerization and mobilization. We had mainframes and then the litany of "enterprise" architectures such as .net\SQL, Java\Oracle, LAMP, or SAP, and "rapid prototyping" architectures such as Paradox, MS Access, and so forth. That produced an alphabet soup of system types, jargon, TLA's, and business processes and lots of profound thought into designing businesses.

These "program a flowchart" languages we've seen, which are largely driven by certain MS SQL server features, are really great at building business processes because all of these systems have always had menu's, forms, data, and reports as the building blocks of the business process. By flow charting the business process as part of the programming, you end up with better visibility by management into the flow of the business system. The revolutionary item with filebound is backing up the flowchart with the data (so we know how things used to be done), being able to show changes to the flowchart and make notes (are we repeating the same mistakes?), being able to separate structured and unstructured data (hint: your "enterprise class" business system should be rigid and scalable, and should is your data structure), supports modularity (filebound in particular supports vb and powershell scripts as blocks in the chart), all while proving a certain degree of access to management to build and play with things like the original xerox machine did. Filebound also has some really nice automation capibilities; e.g. you can sit one end-user with minimal education and have them configure the system to structure data out of e-mail, e-mail attachments, or scans, and you can report on their accuracy and any errors that occur as examples, all using some pretty advanced OCR. Building forms is click and drag as well. Best part is, if management needs to really understand the system, print out the flowchart on 11x17 and hand it to them. Even the oldest coot will "get it".

Not that I'm plugging their software in particular, but when I saw a few short demo's, it left a real impression as to the future of business system programming. Imagine taking several flowcharts and exporting them as a business process; management would become very familiar with the data structure and system structure and where it's deficits and benefits are, and that is a good thing because you are forcing them to understand the structure of their business.

There's always going to be a place enterprise class business systems because scalability and rigidity are features. When the auditors show up, they know what great plains database tables to go look at. That's a benefit to them. When you have all sorts of things modified, they begin asking lots of rough questions.

"Real programming" is going to live everywhere else there aren't business systems and there's a lot of places where it'll fit in. You are not going to be able to build cad to cam software using a flowchart. No freggin' way. Try doing nested tree's. HA!

Re: Why I Believe Scratch Is the Future of Programming

#20

The future of programming is programming. What's described in the article is indeed true, you can build stuff without syntax, you can extend it, etc. But who is this for? I am not a fan of the "Let's teach everyone to code" rhetoric, because this is same as "let's teach everyone to play the piano", or "Let's teach everyone to be good at math!". People who will code will code even if you don't push them to. And most o…

People who will code will code even if you don't push them to.

The booming industry of coding boot camps shows that there are a large number of people who want to code but didn't have the opportunity or knowledge to learn until they were old enough and wealthy enough to pay for private tuition. I would argue that is strong evidence that your assertion is wrong - it's a reasonable assumption there are a number of people who are capable of coding and who want to code but can't afford private lessons and therefore won't ever become a coder.

Lowering the barrier to starting, to the point where it's as simple as running an app without any cost (beyond access to a computer), is a very good thing that greatly benefits a huge number of people.

Post reply on HN