Arthur wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:edu-sig- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
But there is no real point being made beyond that. If one chooses to follow the convention - something like VPython provides a quite convenient way for one to get one's DrawableCircle to actually draw, and without the need to prepare anything in the way of a drawing context - which might otherwise become the most complex, obscure and least relevant portion of the code.
Actually on a little more thought, it is just the point that Scott already made. VPython provides an environment of instantaneous visual feedback. Visual business can be conducted from the command line. Change the color attribute of the object, and the color of the circle instantaneously changes - not even "no compile cycle", no rerun of code of any kind. The object seems in fact like an object - conveys some sense of tangibility, as an object should.
I agree that graphics programming is a great, concrete way, to teach about objects. That is the point of my 2D graphics library. VPython is also a great tool. The one caveat I would make here is that many OO designers would say that the approach taken by VPython allowing direct attribute access is not good style. Objects should generally be manipulated through methods, not by twiddling fields. I know this is fairly common in Python, but maybe Vpython is not the best first example of object-oriented design.
And thereby seems to exist in an environment naturally adaptable to the teaching task at hand.
Art
_______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
-- John M. Zelle, Ph.D. Wartburg College Professor of Computer Science Waverly, IA [EMAIL PROTECTED] (319) 352-8360 _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
