Comments on FD 100

Post Comment

Michiel Trimpe said:

Logo was the best!

I still remember my father ‘explaining’ me Pythagoras theorem when I was around 5 to show me how to draw the roof of a house on our hand-soldered Philips Apple II clone.

I've been hooked ever since.

The best thing was that 25 years later I opened a Logo emulator again and when faced with having to clean the screen somewhere deep, deep from my muscle memory the right command sprang forward: CLEARSCREEN.

28 Oct 2019 05:52 GMT (#1 of 8 comments)

Mihir Chaturvedi said:

Oh man, PC Logo takes me back down the memory lane. We were introduced to PC Logo in 4th grade. That's about 9 years ago. I instantly fell in love with it. The amount of power I had over the computer - ordering it to draw what I want, how I want, was really exciting.

My father had installed Kubuntu on our home computer which had an amazing suite of educational applications, including KTurtle which was (almost) the same as PC Logo. I got so addicted to it, my father suggested me to create a blog and regularly update it with the drawings and the code for it. And so I did! Good times :).

28 Oct 2019 06:21 GMT (#2 of 8 comments)

Wiz21C said:

In the same vein:

CALL -151

That was the entry point to Apple 2's "monitor", i.e., bare bones assembler. Not the most beautiful but very evocative. Gave me a sense of power. :-)

28 Oct 2019 06:42 GMT (#3 of 8 comments)

8LJF said:

The true beauty of Logo comes in the realization that you can add your own words to it, and that all these specialist words you devise are themselves first-class citizens of the language, of syntax and status equal to its generic builtins. For example:

TO CIRCLE
REPEAT 360 [FD 1 RT 1]
END

TO FLOWER
REPEAT 20 [CIRCLE RT 18]
END

And so on ad infinitum, until you arrive at a complete custom vocabulary that concisely and precisely expresses the particular concepts and behaviors of interest and importance to you. In doing so, you move from thinking algorithmically (which is glorified spaghetti) to thinking compositionally, which is the key to scalability – managing complexity as your needs and ambitions grow.

Whereas Algol-y languages treat user-defined vocabulary as second-class citizens, beneath their own privileged built-ins. Which is a ridiculous status when you consider which is actually important to the user: precise, powerful, tailored words that describe their particular problem, or the crude primitive undifferentiated building blocks that the language dumps out of the box?

The beauty of bottom-up programming, as any Lisp fule know :), is that it endlessly tests your own understanding of the problem domain: to define effective, productive words you must have some idea of what you're talking about; you can't help but learn the foundations of the problem space as you go. There's a basic humility to this approach; there’s nowhere to hide laziness or ignorance.

Whereas in top-down programming it's much too easy for highly-educated highly-paid absolute know-nothings to bullshit eternally, constructing great theatrical class architectures; grand mechanical castles in the sky that look all very difficult and impressive to observers while never saying anything relevant or useful.

That key switch from algorithmic to compositional thinking is not a natural conceptual leap for self-learners – it takes a carefully directed prod at a particular point in the learning curve to jump those rails – but it opens up worlds. #PlatosCave

28 Oct 2019 11:21 GMT (#4 of 8 comments)

Mike said:

For all you Logo fans out there, you should really play Duskers. It's "Logo meets Aliens".

28 Oct 2019 13:50 GMT (#5 of 8 comments)

Jerome JH said:

How my, so many souvenirs. Especially the one when our teacher took us to the courtyard and had us do the turtle in real life, him giving the instructions.

30 Oct 2019 12:37 GMT (#6 of 8 comments)

DPisfun0nufispd said:

Thanks for sharing. What a cool story! That must have been a unique time to grow up. Going through adolescence a decade later, computers and the software they ran had advanced significantly enough that the thought of trying to code anything at that age was never even considered.

Your story helped me live through that era vicariously and I can imagine it would have been fascinating to my younger self as well.

07 Sep 2020 23:37 GMT (#7 of 8 comments)

Dhghomon said:

REPEAT 20 [REPEAT 180 [FD 1 RT 2] RT 18]

It's a great image because it reminds me exactly of what we used to do, especially the RT 2 instead of RT 1 to avoid repeating 360 times since the circle looks the same anyway on those monitors. Once you move up to RT 3 or more it begins to look a bit more like a polygon.

08 Sep 2020 05:30 GMT (#8 of 8 comments)
Post Comment