Re: LOGO-L> cloning procedures

[George Mills <mills@softronix.com>]

Copy the code you want in the editor (don't cut it).

Then paste the "clone" and rename the clone to the new procedure you desire.
You had one procedure, now you have two. What if you really did want to rename
the procedure?

Both methods have their pro's and con's.

In the MSWLogo method, if you delete a procedure in the editor (or rename it) the
old procedure will be removed from the workspace (i.e. What You See Is What You Get).
If it did not do this the only way to remove or rename procedures was with ERASE. I think
it's more natural to remove or rename procedures with the editor by cutting or renaming.
You can easily end up with a lot of clutter.

The difference boils down to thinking that when your in the editor as Editing
THE workspace as opposed to thinking your editing a COPY of the workspace. Most
applications don't use the later model and it can be confusing. It's not one is
better than the other but most people don't expect the later behavior and get
confused.

See "-e" command in online help for explanation of expert mode.

Paul C Dench wrote:
> 
> Hello George Mills and fellow Logo users
> 
> When working with children with other (older?) versions of Logo I had
> developed a teaching technique of 'cloning' procedures e.g. once a pattern
> was discerned in a procedure rather than 'typing' all the regular shapes
> (square, triangle, pentagon etc) one by one, the students would edit a
> 'typical' procedure, rename it and make the small changes necessary to suit
> the new purpose. It saved lots of time and errors and focussed their minds
> on the structure inherent in good code.
> 
> Unfortunately MSWLogo doesn't allow such use of the editor - the new
> procedure replaces the old procedure which is then lost. Even the 'cut' &
> 'paste' strategy is not too reliable a process with younger students.
> 
> I did try using 'expert' mode of editing (for me not the students) hoping
> it would get me around the problem but the second editor did not get me
> anywhere.
> 
> So I have devised the following procedure to get around the problem:
> =====================
> to clone :newproc :oldproc
> ;; clones a copy of an old proc under a new name for editing variations
>         define :newproc text :oldproc
>         ed (se :newproc :oldproc) ;; allows editing of :newproc
> end
> =====================
> which generates a 'newproc' as an identical copy of the oldproc' and opens
> the editor to allow the incidental changes to the code.
> 
> Does anyone have a better way of doing this?
> 
> For George Mills:
> 
> * any chance that future versions of MSWLogo could allow a procedure to be
> renamed in the editor without losing the old name?
> 
> * or alternatively how about a 'clone' primitive
> 
> * incidentally now I have found out how to get into 'expert' editing, what
> would I use it for?
> 
> P.S. I hope you are all finding the philosophical and technical dialogue on
> 'Why Logo?' and 'Why not Toon Talk?' as fascinating as I have. Worth bottling!
> 
> Paul Dench
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.

--
===============================================================
George Mills (mills@softronix.com)
http://www.softronix.com/
The www page contains some very powerful educational software.
Our single most important investment is our kids.
---------------------------------------------------------------
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.