«

Hi

My son like many youngsters been around computers, fast online games, he
acturly for main part learned to read and write ,beside his second language
english , and may I say he is quite good at it age 15 , but as some of you
know, 3D games also offer edditors and script options , or rather
programming choppers and dust clouds in scenes.
Now beside my bad english, my problem is, that I like him to learn decent
programming ------- sure I know the best way to learn is looking at source
code and change a bit here or there to se the actural results, but with his
knowleage about programming he proberly fail to se how functions work and
even he made some quite nice effects in the scenes in "Operation falshpoint
resistance" , I just know that he would profit from learning from buttom up,
a real programming language.
Now from an old friend I been advised Phyton, and as I know a bit about
programming ( Lisp ) , I agrea after checking a few links ; guess Phyton is
very much C++ like ,so investing in his interests programming scenes for
games, could be in his faviour .
Now I agrea that my own knowleage about compilers and more advanced
programming are limited, and my fear is that I will need some sort of C.
compiler causing day's and weeks of trouble setting up ------- or what do
the group think ; my question is, if there today are compilers that is set
up and work as simple as for instance the first Pascal compilers .
Well I agrea that my own trouble programming, never been the actural
programming, but all the silli trouble with compilers, as you se amatures
don't care if the program spend a bit more memmory ,as long as it work and
acturly produce compiled code.
Guess my question is, if it is possible to find a compiler that is fit for
amatures, one that an amature will not have to fight before it is ready to
use. One where you ,as when I learned programming , don't need to be a
compiler specialist before you even learn programming.

P.C.

Hi

"P.C." <> skrev i en meddelelse
news:4026488d$0$95048$ k...
> Hi
>

Sorry Python not "Phyton".
Please don't just ansver about wrong spelling.

P.C.
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/

P.C. wrote:
> Hi
>
> My son like many youngsters been around computers, fast online games, he
> acturly for main part learned to read and write ,beside his second language
> english , and may I say he is quite good at it age 15 , but as some of you
> know, 3D games also offer edditors and script options , or rather
> programming choppers and dust clouds in scenes.
> Now beside my bad english, my problem is, that I like him to learn decent
> programming ------- sure I know the best way to learn is looking at source
> code and change a bit here or there to se the actural results, but with his
> knowleage about programming he proberly fail to se how functions work and
> even he made some quite nice effects in the scenes in "Operation falshpoint
> resistance" , I just know that he would profit from learning from buttom up,
> a real programming language.
> Now from an old friend I been advised Phyton, and as I know a bit about
> programming ( Lisp ) , I agrea after checking a few links ; guess Phyton is
> very much C++ like ,so investing in his interests programming scenes for
> games, could be in his faviour .
> Now I agrea that my own knowleage about compilers and more advanced
> programming are limited, and my fear is that I will need some sort of C.
> compiler causing day's and weeks of trouble setting up ------- or what do
> the group think ; my question is, if there today are compilers that is set
> up and work as simple as for instance the first Pascal compilers .
> Well I agrea that my own trouble programming, never been the actural
> programming, but all the silli trouble with compilers, as you se amatures
> don't care if the program spend a bit more memmory ,as long as it work and
> acturly produce compiled code.
> Guess my question is, if it is possible to find a compiler that is fit for
> amatures, one that an amature will not have to fight before it is ready to
> use. One where you ,as when I learned programming , don't need to be a
> compiler specialist before you even learn programming.
>
> P.C.
>
>
Python is an interpreted language, not a compiled one. So you don't need
to worry about compilers at all. This makes it a little easier to get
into than compiled languages. I thin python is a very good introduction
to someone who knows nothing about programming.

At the risk of making a lot of python fans angry, I would also suggest
that you look at java. This IS a compiled language (although ironically,
the compiled bytecode is interpreted). I suggest this for a few reasons:
* You cannot really avoid thinking in an object-oriented way when
writing java. I suspect that python will allow you to develop some very
nasyt habits.
* The java tutorial is massive, and has loads of examples.
* I have not seen anything like BlueJ for python. BlueJ is an excellent
beginners IDE with editor, debugger, and a UML-like diagram that shows
how your classes interconnect.

Better, learn a little of both languages.

Steve

I think that Python is really the best shioce... I started programming in
Python to make games and soon I started to listen people talking about how
easy and fast it was to create games in Python. Now I'm one of then =) .
Python is an object oriented interpreted language that can be used to do
from the simplest things to the extremely powerfull. The fact that it is
interpreted means that it's really easy to "compile" or run aplication
without extensive knowledge.
In fact when I took my first look at the Python documentation, after a few
hours I was starting to play with code.

If you are interested in looking at game programming with Python take a look
at this site:

www.pygame.org

Regards:

Ricardo

I'm sorry for my bad English but it is not my primary language...

In article <4026488d$0$95048$> ,
P.C. <> wrote:
>
>Guess my question is, if it is possible to find a compiler that is fit
>for amatures, one that an amature will not have to fight before it is
>ready to use. One where you ,as when I learned programming , don't need
>to be a compiler specialist before you even learn programming.

Python doesn't use a compiler per se; like Perl, it's an interpreted
language, similar to using a VisualBasic macro in Word (though without
the baggage of Word, of course). If you're using a Windows computer,
just download a copy of Python from http://www.python.org/

If you've got a Linux box, you probably already have Python available.
Try typing "python" at the shell prompt.

Either way, Python is popular among teenagers, and we've had several on
comp.lang.python, including one from the Netherlands. I'm assuming
he'll show up soon and offer to talk to your son directly.

You'll also want to take a look at
http://www.python.org/topics/learn/non-prog.html
--
Aahz () <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"The joy of coding Python should be in seeing short, concise, readable
classes that express a lot of action in a small amount of clear code --
not in reams of trivial code that bores the reader to death." --GvR

Steve Horsley wrote:

> P.C. wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> My son like many youngsters been around computers, fast online games, he
>> acturly for main part learned to read and write ,beside his second
>> language
>> english , and may I say he is quite good at it age 15 , but as some
>> of you
>> know, 3D games also offer edditors and script options , or rather
>> programming choppers and dust clouds in scenes.
>> Now beside my bad english, my problem is, that I like him to learn decent
>> programming ------- sure I know the best way to learn is looking at
>> source
>> code and change a bit here or there to se the actural results, but
>> with his
>> knowleage about programming he proberly fail to se how functions work and
>> even he made some quite nice effects in the scenes in "Operation
>> falshpoint
>> resistance" , I just know that he would profit from learning from
>> buttom up,
>> a real programming language.
>> Now from an old friend I been advised Phyton, and as I know a bit about
>> programming ( Lisp ) , I agrea after checking a few links ; guess
>> Phyton is
>> very much C++ like ,so investing in his interests programming scenes for
>> games, could be in his faviour .
>> Now I agrea that my own knowleage about compilers and more advanced
>> programming are limited, and my fear is that I will need some sort of C.
>> compiler causing day's and weeks of trouble setting up ------- or what do
>> the group think ; my question is, if there today are compilers that is
>> set
>> up and work as simple as for instance the first Pascal compilers .
>> Well I agrea that my own trouble programming, never been the actural
>> programming, but all the silli trouble with compilers, as you se amatures
>> don't care if the program spend a bit more memmory ,as long as it work
>> and
>> acturly produce compiled code.
>> Guess my question is, if it is possible to find a compiler that is fit
>> for
>> amatures, one that an amature will not have to fight before it is
>> ready to
>> use. One where you ,as when I learned programming , don't need to be a
>> compiler specialist before you even learn programming.
>>
>> P.C.
>>
>>
> Python is an interpreted language, not a compiled one. So you don't need
> to worry about compilers at all. This makes it a little easier to get
> into than compiled languages. I thin python is a very good introduction
> to someone who knows nothing about programming.
>
> At the risk of making a lot of python fans angry, I would also suggest
> that you look at java. This IS a compiled language (although ironically,
> the compiled bytecode is interpreted). I suggest this for a few reasons:
> * You cannot really avoid thinking in an object-oriented way when
> writing java. I suspect that python will allow you to develop some very
> nasyt habits.
> * The java tutorial is massive, and has loads of examples.
> * I have not seen anything like BlueJ for python. BlueJ is an excellent
> beginners IDE with editor, debugger, and a UML-like diagram that shows
> how your classes interconnect.
>
> Better, learn a little of both languages.
>
> Steve

Angry, no. But I don't think your advice is very sound. First, Python
"compiles" to bytecodes much the way Java does. If Java does anything
different, it is that it can employ a JIT compiler to speed up the
execution of the bytecodes. Second, I disagree that Python will make
someone develop "bad habits". Using object oriented programming is not
the end-all to all the world's problems. Java forces you into this model
at all times, Python doesn't. If anything, I think Java's view of the
world is flawed - sometimes objects aren't the answer to a programming
problem. For a beginner, having to do all your thinking in objects makes
learning the basics harder, in my view. Last, there are plenty of good
(if not great) editors for Python. Pushing an editor that includes
things as UML is not really very productive for a beginner, and it could
be argued it not even very useful for advanced programmers (if your
class hierarchy is s complex that you need (live) UML, you probably have
too complex of a design.) I do agree with your last sentiment, learn
lots of languages, Python, Java, C/C++, etc. and see which one(s) meets
your needs best.

-D

Check out: http://pygame.org/

If your son is interested in making games, and you want him to learn
Python, I believe that link will help you.

- Josiah

Steve Horsley wrote:

>...
>
> At the risk of making a lot of python fans angry, I would also suggest
> that you look at java. This IS a compiled language (although ironically,
> the compiled bytecode is interpreted).

Python and Java both compile to byte-code. The only difference is that
Python does it automatically whereas Java requires you to compile manually.

I suggest this for a few reasons:
> * You cannot really avoid thinking in an object-oriented way when
> writing java. I suspect that python will allow you to develop some very
> nasyt habits.

I disagree that the opposite of object orientation is "nasty habits."
Forcing every problem into an object oriented paradigm is itself a nasty
(and ultimately confusing) habit.

> * The java tutorial is massive, and has loads of examples.

Is it more massive than these:

* http://www.ibiblio.org/obp/thinkCSpy/
* http://diveintopython.org/
* http://www.mindview.net/Books/TIPython
* http://www.python.org/doc/current/tut/tut.html
* http://honors.montana.edu/~jjc/easytut/easytut/

And this one is specifically about game programming:

* http://pygame.org/docs/tut/chimp/ChimpLineByLine.html

> * I have not seen anything like BlueJ for python. BlueJ is an excellent
> beginners IDE with editor, debugger, and a UML-like diagram that shows
> how your classes interconnect.

I haven't tried BlueJ so I can't compare but I don't think an IDE could
make up for Java's flaws as a learning language. "Hello world" in Java
is 7 lines compared to 1 in Python. The Python version has just two
concepts: printing and strings. The Java version brings in three
keywords (class, public, static) a module, an object, a function, two
types, etc.

> Better, learn a little of both languages.

Can't disagree with that. Learn Python. Learn Pygame. Write your game.
Then learn Java to have something good to put on your resume.

Paul Prescod

"P.C." <> writes:

> Sorry Python not "Phyton".

Not a bad name, actually....describes what we do pretty well (not with
each other, of course.)
--
KBK

Steve Horsley <> writes:

> At the risk of making a lot of python fans angry, I would also suggest
> that you look at java. This IS a compiled language (although
> ironically, the compiled bytecode is interpreted).

Same as Python.

Actually, difference between an interpreter and a compiler is pretty
blurred. Let's see: a compiler compiles to machine code which is
interpreted by the microcode engine in the processor etc. ad infinitum.

> I suggest this for a few reasons: * You cannot really avoid thinking
> in an object-oriented way when writing java.

This is not an advantage.

> I suspect that python will allow you to develop some very nasyt
> habits.

For example? Surely you don't mean programming in a functional style
when that is optimal as opposed to always using objects?

> * The java tutorial is massive, and has loads of examples.

This is not an advantage. One of the features of Python is how simple
a relatively complete tutorial can be.

> * I have not seen anything like BlueJ for python. BlueJ is an
> excellent beginners IDE with editor, debugger, and a UML-like
> diagram that shows how your classes interconnect.

This is pretty cool. It reminds me a lot of Python's IDLE in its
approach and target audience. BlueJ's debugger is slightly more
capable than IDLE's is, and IDLE doesn't have the UML representation
of classes (though there is Bicycle Repair Man) which is deeply
integrated into BlueJ.

I'll be looking more closely at this; thanks for the reference!
--
KBK