supernicejohn, on 20 September 2017 - 03:54 PM, said:
The thing that would make them cool in my book is to be useful as a transitioning tool to learn a specific language, if one were to gradually replace the blocks with text.
So... kind of like
code.org works? It's all drag 'n drop (like scratch), but you can also write completely in javascript if you prefer. One of my highschool classes used it, and there is a certain point in the lessons where it encourages you to transition to text. I personally used text the entire time, but I know people in my class who did not.
You don't actually have to install
robotc on the NXT, it does that for you. Though you will need to purchase a license for extended use...
Dave-ee Jones, on 19 September 2017 - 11:34 PM, said:
Just to clarify things, here's my stance:
1) Visual programming does not replace text based programming. I personally prefer text based
2) Visual is not inherently better or worse as far as utility goes; it is simply different.
3) It has strengths and weaknesses, just as text based does. But this goes for ANY programming language - R will beat Go in the right circumstances, and vice versa.
Elaborating on this a bit:
- Visual programming is better for introducing kids to programming because it is more approachable. Don't ask me why, it just is.
- Visual programming is better for certain jobs in industry. The best example I can think of is assembly lines. You really don't want to try and visualize what position the robotic arm is in - much better to actually see it.
- Text based programming is better at some things as well. You wouldn't want to do optimization on a visual program. 'course, that's mostly handled by compilers now.