LOGO-L> Requirements (was: dynamic programming projects and speed of MicroWorlds)

[Chuck Shavit <CShavit@MagicSquare.com>]

Jeff wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 25 Oct 1997, George Mills wrote:
> > I try to limit (because I am a limited resource) how far
> > and  wide I go in each area. I supply the minimal tools needed to do a
> > lot of different things.
> Thanks George for such a detailed reply. I take the statements above to
> be the nub of your design rationale(?)
> MicroWorlds on the other hand, embodies distinct design choices to
> provide particular tools, at the expense of other functionality.
> It's the quality of both these choices, and their implementation, that 
> makes MicroWorlds so good. It's why MicroWorlds is the preferred medium 
> in the Australian 'computer rich' schools, where the entire 
> curriculum is expressed on the childrens personal laptops.

Surely MW and MSWLogo (and other "kids languages") have each their
strengths and weaknesses.  This thread seems to expose them well indeed.
For example, Jeff above mentions that particular tools (picture editors?
Visual-Basic-like positioning of controls?) make MW a preferred medium in
schools.  George mentioned a slew of MSWLogo capabilities like 3D, animated
GIFs and many others.

But I could not find a mention of the metric according to which the
languages are being judged.  How does one judge whether a given feature in
one of these environments makes that environment better suited for its use?

Many of the contributors to this news group are educators.  My question to
them is, what are you using Logo for, and what are your requirements from
Logo (or any other language) to make it suitable for what you are using it?

Thanks,
Chuck Shavit

---------------------------------------------------------------
Please post messages to the Logo forum to logo-l@gsn.org.  Mail
questions about the list administration to logofdn@gsn.org.  To
unsubscribe send    unsubscribe logo-l    to majordomo@gsn.org.