The message below is being cross-posted from the LogoForum. Please
reply here at comp.lang.logo and it will be cross-posted back to the
LogoForum. The original author of this message is
taobert@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Harvey says:
> The /whole point/ of Logo is user interface. It's all Lisp inside,
> but what makes Logo Logo is a collection of choices about what kids will
> find natural/easy/inviting.
Logo as a natural, easy, user friendly Lisp... I agree
Just a question, to mischievously boost the discussion:
Can we standardize Logo without it losing its soul?
(and what's the soul of Logo )
Bertrand
__._,_.___
LogoForum messages are archived at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LogoForum
In article <fonm41$23ge$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
bh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Brian Harvey) wrote:
> gene_sullivan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
says:
> >Brian's mentioning of how some logo imps use `edit', an
> >IDE feature. This got me to thinking that some hassles
> >might be avoided if a logo scripting standard were developed
> >in which interactive editing weren't allowed.
>
> This misses the point of the example. I happened to pick EDIT to
mention
> but could just as easily have picked ERASE or even (longer ago) MAKE.
The
> issue isn't about interactivity but about whether special forms are used
to
> make the most common case easier to type, or whether syntactic
uniformity
> is valued.
>
> >Brian also mentioned another issue involving scoping: lexical VS
> >dynamic. As lexical scoping can be used to implement dynamic scoping,
> >but -- unless I am mistaken -- not the other way around,
> >it might be good to have lexical scoping used in the `root stock'
> >infrastructure and have extensions (modules, libraries, whatever)
> >flesh out the details of implementing dynamic binding/scoping and such.
>
> Well, first of all, you /are/ mistaken -- see, for example, my Pascal
> compiler in CSLS vol 3. But secondly, if we are to make this sort of
> argument, then the conclusion has to be that we should forget about Logo
> altogether and just program in God's programming language, Scheme.
> The /whole point/ of Logo is user interface. It's all Lisp inside,
> but what makes Logo Logo is a collection of choices about what kids will
> find natural/easy/inviting.
|
