Microsoft Small Basic • Hacker News Board

Re: Microsoft Small Basic

#31

Post by pmelendez » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 3:56 PM UTC

bam365 wrote: post #28

I'd like to be positive about this especially considering the thought behind it, but...this is bad. I read the tutorial PDF hoping not to find BASIC-style unstructured programming. I was disappointed. QBASIC was the first language that I learned as a kid, and I regret it to this day. Learning to solve all my programming problems using GOTO in such a formative time set me back months when I finally moved to structured…

>"QBASIC was the first language that I learned as a kid, and I regret it to this day"

GWBasic was my first programming language and I don't regret it at all. It enabled 9-years old me to start messing around with programming without too much hassle and honestly using (or abusing) goto then didn't interferred when I have to learn Scheme(my second language) at the university.

For a young kind (Also, why so much hate to goto? there are not many alternatives if you are programming in assembly anyway.

Re: Microsoft Small Basic

#32

Post by ska » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 4:11 PM UTC

rottyguy wrote: post #2

I like the idea of a lightweight programming language/environment dedicated to entry level learners. Perhaps what would also be interesting is having a basic-esq L/E for whatever programming paradigm that is useful (procedural, oop, functional, etc.)

Have you had a look at http://racket-lang.org/ and the associated books?

Re: Microsoft Small Basic

#33

Post by nine_k » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 4:17 PM UTC

BFay wrote: post #29

nly wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm... nah, go straight to Haskell ;) Just imagine them in 5th grade trying to explain Monads to their friends.

Yeah, it would be interesting to learn about pure functions and referential transparency before basic algebra.

It would be easy to understand algebra in school.

Re: Microsoft Small Basic

#34

Post by lloydde » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 4:20 PM UTC

moron4hire wrote: post #25

Recently ran across this, another MS research project: https://www.touchdevelop.com/ It runs completely in the browser. There are some interesting things in the interface, stuff I had even been considering adding to my project, like a full on-screen keyboard with special keys.

Is Small Basic a Microsoft Research project?

Re: Microsoft Small Basic

#35

Post by kbenson » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 4:22 PM UTC

yoha wrote: post #15

Gys wrote: post #14

I get a 503 Service Unavailable ?! Anyways, it probably did not change much in the last few days: https://web.archive.org/web/20150727212504/http://smallbasic... Its good this is (still ?) available. But I would prefer my friends or kids to learn in a more platform independent way. Like Python.

Nitpick: *it's

Have you ever looked up the definition of nitpick? I just did on a few different services. It's not flattering, and provides a good narrative for the downvotes.

Re: Microsoft Small Basic

#36

Post by pokpokpok » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 4:25 PM UTC

the_af wrote: post #27

euroclydon wrote: post #8

If I put my kid in front of a modern Windows PC, leave them alone for a few hours, and hope they learn something, I'm not very optimistic. Let's say I install Small Basic on Windows 8.1 or 10. So now I've put my kid in front of an operating system that has such a high-level UI that it doesn't even have a proper list of programs. The media consuming portion of the OS is so heavily emphasized over the creative portion…

I don't get your argument. I wrote my first programs using the very limited BASIC that came with my Commodore 64. Now that was primarily an entertainment device, and I still managed to learn interesting things with it!

the internet is an infinite amusement park, desperately plying you for pageviews

Re: Microsoft Small Basic

#37

Post by nine_k » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 4:25 PM UTC

dr_zoidberg wrote: post #5

Well, if my nephews ever want to take on programming this might be a good place to start. Simple syntax, simple concepts, even the posibility of third-party libraries? Sounds interesting for teaching the young (and not so young too, but at that I'd prefer Python because of it's easier "real world usage" -- this does seem a bit too oriented at "toy programming").

I think that to make a kid interested in programming, instant visual feedback is important. That is, writing (simple) games is about the best start.

For little kids, MIT Scratch should be good.

Python + pygame, or Scheme/Racket with its simple game-development features, or even Javascript + any 2D or 3D visualization library should hook an older kid. All of these have simple and compact syntax (JS is worse in this regard, of course).

Re: Microsoft Small Basic

#38

Post by keithb- » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 4:27 PM UTC

bphogan wrote: post #20

tajen wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't Javascript already suitable for that?

I have taught JS in higher education to complete beginners for three years now and have been very successful doing so. The secret is that you teach how to program, not how to JavaScript. How to program is entirely different. It involves breaking down problems, creating abstractions for those problems, and turning them into code. And JavaScript is the one language that gets out of your way and lets you create programs…

I agree with this sentiment. We don't need new, simpler languages to teach programming concepts; we just need a better approach to teaching. We don't skip teaching the English language to toddlers in favor of a simpler one. I learn "cat" before "encyclopedia" and "hungry" before "enlightened". Programming languages have similar levels of abstraction so one can start with basics and allow the growth/understanding/grok to come from exploring the depths of abstraction inherent within.

I think the intention here is to somehow reach a point where the understanding is complete. As if one can say "There, now I understand all of [insert programming language]." and tick off some item on their career progression or bucket list. It's simply not like that.

Re: Microsoft Small Basic

#39

Post by stephengillie » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 4:44 PM UTC

QBasic was the first programming language I learned, so I was curious:

> How is it different from QBASIC?

> Unlike QBASIC, Small Basic is based on .Net and can consume (not produce) "Objects".

> It supports distinct Operations, Properties and Events.

> It doesn't have GOSUB :)

So this looks like an Object-Oriented QBasic. Awesome!

Re: Microsoft Small Basic

#40

Post by j_s » Fri, Jul 31, 2015, 4:45 PM UTC

dr_zoidberg wrote: post #5

Well, if my nephews ever want to take on programming this might be a good place to start. Simple syntax, simple concepts, even the posibility of third-party libraries? Sounds interesting for teaching the young (and not so young too, but at that I'd prefer Python because of it's easier "real world usage" -- this does seem a bit too oriented at "toy programming").

There has been a significant investment in creating resources for teaching programming with SmallBasic; these wind up being more important than the tool (or even choice of language) itself!