Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

worrydream.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 193 posts

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#111

Post by mattmcknight »

bretthopper wrote: post #24

There's already two comments here about being "harsh" or "ungracious" towards Khan Academy which is ridiculous. The usual HN article that contains criticisms is usually limited to that. Some rant that took 10 minutes to write and contains nothing constructive. Bret Victor put an insane amount of time into this (I can only assume) and is truly advancing mindsets about programming tools and learning. We should all be t…

I just found the analogy of a microwave with blank buttons turned me off as being an unnecessary rhetorical straw man. I know what fill means, and I know what ellipse means, and I know what numbers are. Discovering what those words mean in a different context is not analogous to blank buttons.

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#112

Post by russelluresti »

gfunk911 wrote: post #6

Couple random thoughts: 1. Is Bret Victor now the Linus of cutting-edge programming environments? 2. I don't have enough experience with Light Table or the Khan Academy environment to know whether Khan is just a first step on the way to something like Bret's vision, or more of a diversion. I was fairly impressed with the Khan env in my limited time with it. 3. I HATE telling people they shouldn't speak their mind and…

Not to take away from Bret's ideas, because they're great, but here are my responses.

1. I'd say that there's a significant difference between Bret and Linus. Specifically, when Linus believes that developers need better tools, we get git. When Bret believes developers need better tools, we get... blog posts and videos showing faked functionality. Now, that's not to say this won't change in the future. But, as of right now, Bret is starting to look like an "idea guy" in a world of "doers."

3. The reason I'm irked by this post is that I'm under the impression that Bret was specifically asked by Khan Academy to consult on the project (I'm under this impression because this is what I was told). He chose not to consult. So, all of these things he's pointing out now, he had the opportunity to affect them and change them before they were ever released to the public. He had the opportunity to completely revolutionize how new developers learn and he chose to turn away from it. If he's so passionate about the topic, why would he turn it down? Regardless of the reason, to me, it's a "speak now or forever hold your peace." He had the chance to speak, he chose not to, turning around after the fact and saying what it could have been is him doing too little too late.

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#113

Post by apu »

Ygg2 wrote: post #71
gojomo wrote: post #63

Beautiful and inspirational, and yet... Sometimes becoming able to hold the 'invisible state' in memory is the skill to learn. Consider the 'dual N-back' drilling which seems to improve working memory, and then also (by some studies) other testable fluid intelligence. The whole point is holding more and more hidden state in your mind. (To 'show the state' would defeat the purpose of the game.) Similarly, sometimes st…

Having an environment such as one Victor styled for big systems (big as in millions of lines of code), would prove unfeasible (hell auto-complete has a hiccup when lines start getting into hundreds of thousands). Those tools he proposes seem to be very beginner and RAD oriented (even if he claims otherwise). I've seen IDE's choke on smaller code bases and this not only has auto-complete, auto-update but also state/fr…

Why do systems need millions of lines of code?

If you can build a complete operating system + major programs in 20,000 lines of code, what system should need a million?

http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr2008004_steps08.pdf

(They're not quite down to 20,000 yet, but they're getting there)

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#114

Post by szx »

dkarl wrote: post #109

Alan Perlis wrote, "To understand a program, you must become both the machine and the program." This view is a mistake, and it is this widespread and virulent mistake that keeps programming a difficult and obscure art. A person is not a machine, and should not be forced to think like one. This is nothing but prejudice, and, ironically, it is contrary to how we work as human beings. In any field, we celebrate sympathy…

Computers are programmable. Pianos, horses, fires are not. Some (lower level) tasks absolutely require the programmer to think like a machine. Most do not.

We have the power to make it easier for ourselves, and lower the barrier of entry for others. They might develop that sympathy you speak of later on, but there's no reason why that should be a prerequisite.

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#115

Post by teek »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #57

I really enjoyed Bret's article. I don't necessarily agree with all of it but the main argument is quite sound. Bret writes: "People understand what they can see." which is true for some people but not true for all people. I've got one daughter who is very verbal, one very visual. They learn differently. This in a minor nit though, his exploration of the 'code' / 'example' model is good. I particularly liked the comm…

In some languages like perl, there's a named parameter form that's becoming more common. If I were to rewrite the example in perl, it would look like this:

  ellipse(x=>60, y=>50, height=>50, width=>100);
Yes, it is more typing, but you don't need fancy auto-complete to give you hints when reading.

There's also nothing from stopping us from making a "training wheels" interface in javascript:

  draw-ellipse({x:60, y:50, height:50, width:100});

  function draw-ellipse(o) {
    ellipse(o.x, o.y, o.height, o.width);
  }

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#117

Post by chipsy »

mattmcknight wrote: post #111
bretthopper wrote: post #24

There's already two comments here about being "harsh" or "ungracious" towards Khan Academy which is ridiculous. The usual HN article that contains criticisms is usually limited to that. Some rant that took 10 minutes to write and contains nothing constructive. Bret Victor put an insane amount of time into this (I can only assume) and is truly advancing mindsets about programming tools and learning. We should all be t…

I just found the analogy of a microwave with blank buttons turned me off as being an unnecessary rhetorical straw man. I know what fill means, and I know what ellipse means, and I know what numbers are. Discovering what those words mean in a different context is not analogous to blank buttons.

Okay, but what is ellipse(50,25,32,5)?

"ellipse" and numbers are only hints, just as blank buttons and dials are only hints.

Programmers rely a lot on IDE support now to see the parameters...which is exactly what Bret is talking about!

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#118

Post by brandoncapecci »

mattmcknight wrote: post #111
bretthopper wrote: post #24

There's already two comments here about being "harsh" or "ungracious" towards Khan Academy which is ridiculous. The usual HN article that contains criticisms is usually limited to that. Some rant that took 10 minutes to write and contains nothing constructive. Bret Victor put an insane amount of time into this (I can only assume) and is truly advancing mindsets about programming tools and learning. We should all be t…

I just found the analogy of a microwave with blank buttons turned me off as being an unnecessary rhetorical straw man. I know what fill means, and I know what ellipse means, and I know what numbers are. Discovering what those words mean in a different context is not analogous to blank buttons.

His argument really seems to be that the relationship between the input and output is not obvious, not that you don't understand the words themselves. The blank button is a fitting analogy to the uncertainty of the arguments.

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#119

Post by rictic »

mattmcknight wrote: post #111
bretthopper wrote: post #24

There's already two comments here about being "harsh" or "ungracious" towards Khan Academy which is ridiculous. The usual HN article that contains criticisms is usually limited to that. Some rant that took 10 minutes to write and contains nothing constructive. Bret Victor put an insane amount of time into this (I can only assume) and is truly advancing mindsets about programming tools and learning. We should all be t…

I just found the analogy of a microwave with blank buttons turned me off as being an unnecessary rhetorical straw man. I know what fill means, and I know what ellipse means, and I know what numbers are. Discovering what those words mean in a different context is not analogous to blank buttons.

I disagree. You know what buttons are, you know what a microwave is, you know you need to put the food inside and then push some buttons to indicate the time, then press a start button.

The thing that you don't know in the programming example is what those numbers do. I've written processing.js code before and I'd be half-guessing if you asked me what each parameter to elipse() does.

Re: Bret Victor: Learnable Programming

#120

Post by Hitchhiker »

remarkably insightful bits:

"Programming is a way of thinking, not a rote skill. Learning about "for" loops is not learning to program, any more than learning about pencils is learning to draw. " [1]

" Transforming flow from an invisible, ephemeral notion into a solid thing that can be studied explicitly. "

" The create-by-reacting way of thinking could be stated as: start with something, then adjust until it's right." ( its funny how lean-startup could be compressed into this one bit )

" Visualize data, not code. Dynamic behavior, not static structure. "

Post reply on HN