Alice (game tool)

[ZiggyZack99]

This is really cool. It allows the average Zack (or Joshua, or Phil) to do cool crap! This tool/application is really cool. You can create 3-D games with it using the Java 3D library. Oh yeah, you needn't know Java. You just need a slight skill with holding down a mouse button and releasing it with this cool thingy's drag and drop "programming" enviroment. Even a 4th-grader could figure this app out! Anyways, it's really cool. Compatible with all manners of WinNT (XP, Vista)! So, what are you waiting for? Click the banner above and delve into the fun of pretend awesome! Wow. That sounded like an advertisement. Maybe it was... anyways, who here's ever used it? I know it's not really programming, but still.
http://alice.org

TL;DR: Don't make a reply if you didn't read it.

[Jessii]

Drag & drop programming is never good. Also many will argue that Java is crap.

[DearonElensar]

Drag and drop does not equal programming.
Otherwise Game Maker and RPG Maker would also be programming tools (and to some extend also Visual Basic, tho VB does require to type at least some things)

[Ciph3rzer0]

That's funny that you guys say that. I watched a video online where microsoft was unveiling it's new language F#, and the guy talked about 30 years ago developers imagined that we WOULD be programming in drag and drop environments. Surely after 30 years we wouldn't still be typing instructions into the computer! absurd!

Who are you to qualify what is programming and what is not? What gives you the right? How about anyone who doesn't code their programs in a HEX editor is not really programming?

The fact is, programming does not HAVE to be what it is now, and arguing that point is extremely naive. Development in programming IDE's have not really improved much. So really, just because we're still in the stone age of IDEs, doesn't mean there's no room for improvement.

Drag and Drop programming can equal programming, especially since Alice is Java at heart, what's the difference? if I copy and paste did I code a project? what about code reusability? This is essentially just that...

Also, I don't know much about game maker, but I would imagine it could be considered programming as well.

A quick Google Search returns this definition for programming:

the act of creating software or some other set of instructions for a computer. cyber.law.harvard.edu/readinessguide/glossary.html

The act of creating some set of instructions for a computer. Whether that be compiled machine code or interpreted byte-code or an constructing the rules for an expert system, or creating a bash script or a batch file or making a javascript page or making a bloody freaking game maker game. According to Harvard's definition, those are all programming.

There is no qualification based on HOW those instructions are given to the computer. In the end, it doesn't matter.

ALICE is good at what ALICE does. Game Maker has it's purpose. C is good for getting down and dirty, but not everything needs C, or is even a smart choice for C. Not everyone should learn on C, or Java, or whatever. The reasoning behind ALICE is to let the student focus on the logic of programming rather than the syntax of a language. Believe it or not, there is a rather large learning curve to programming, and ALICE smooths it out a little.

And java is not crap. That statement is simply dumb. Java is crap at X, or Java is good at Y makes sense. And VB is a programming language and is a lot better than most "skilled" programmers will give it credit. Believe it or not, not everything is tailored for your needs.

So yeah, recap:
-Drag and Drop programming was at one time considered to be the future of programming.
-Java is not crap. Java is good at what Java is good at. It may be crap at certain tasks, but that does not make the whole language crap.
-(Drag and Drop != programming) == false; // The method of entering instructions into a computer is irrelevant.
-Therefore Game Maker and most certainly VB can be considered programming.

I personally don't use ALICE, but at my university we are seeing less dropouts of computer science related fields now that we're using half a semester of ALICE before getting into Java. Whether or not that's simply because it's easier, well, we shall see. Theoretically, it's a good idea, and students should understand more.

[Glaiel-Gamer]

Drag and drop isn't the future of programming because drag and drop will never get you the same control that manual languages give, unless you have so many drag and drop boxes that it's basically the same as typing it by hand, but it takes longer.

[Pasty-Flawss]

Drag and drop programming will not be the future, maybe for the GUI's but not the logic behind a program. Drag and Drop would no way be able to handle a 10000 line program it would just be too messy and unstable, if you got a simple error in the program debugging it could take hours or even days.

[Ciph3rzer0]

1) I never said it was

2) I'm not implying that the future of programming is going to be like ALICE. It is slower to use ALICE. But I don't see why we won't possibly see more Visual IDE's.

IDEs are becoming more visual. And there is an interest in Visual Programming, dragging and dropping programming elements in a flowchart can be easier for a lot of simple programs. And especially with the focus on modular programming, I believe it can and will work really well.

And also, the speed at which you can enter code is not the only factor to consider when picking a language/ programming environment. Sometimes if it takes 10% longer to enter it in the first time, but is easier for others to modify or for you to debug, it can be worth it. And that's where I think Visual IDEs will win out. ESPECIALLY with businesses. (think of the ridiculousness of COBOL and tell me that anything is impossible...)

[CronoMan]

Visual C# can be drag&drop as well.. you can create an entire (working) database application without writing a single line of code

[DearonElensar]

So why are we bitching on people using Game Maker then?

[Ciph3rzer0]

At 10/28/08 10:01 AM, DearonElensar wrote: So why are we bitching on people using Game Maker then?

It may still be considered programming, but the usefulness of learning and writing Game Maker games may be minimal. I think it is good to encourage to use Game Maker (or ALICE or whatever) to learn and/or make quick and easy programs/games, then to move on ASAP to something that is more flexible and useful.

But if someone really just wants to make a game as a hobby, and doesn't really want to know any other aspects of programming, then you shouldn't tear them down for using Game Maker. It's fine for what the want to do.

[DearonElensar]

I am not saying it i bad, i am saying it is not programming.
With drag and drop you are always limited to whatever the developers decided to let you do, which in my opinion defeats purpose of programming (unless, of course, you find out a method to generate new drag and drop "actions" from a drag a drop interface, but that sounds like a lot of trouble for something that is not worth it)

[kernalphage]

oh hey, i remember this! unless you have your own 3d modeling program to add your own elements... it's pretty much a children's "intro to programming".

where the intro is "computers do you what you tell them.
usually.

At 10/27/08 07:16 PM, Jessii wrote: Drag & drop programming is never good. Also many will argue that Java is crap.

drag 'n' drop is... well, useful, sometimes. mostly in simple robot prorams. (FIRST use labview)

logic flow is usually awkward. for example, LabView actually hides half of an if/else statement at any one time.

[WinterFox525]

heh, average Zak? That's my name! hah!

anyway, i agree with most people here, drag and drop isn't the future. You don't get the same control as you do with programming languages.

[CronoMan]

At 10/30/08 08:37 AM, WinterFox525 wrote: heh, average Zak? That's my name! hah!

anyway, i agree with most people here, drag and drop isn't the future. You don't get the same control as you do with programming languages.

Even so, I do believe that the languages we use today are horribly oldschool.. I want programming to move alot further away from the operating system and underlying devices, allowing us to use more abstract thought - and who knows, maybe we'll some day actually manage to create real artificial intelligence, instead of braindead metallic roaches

[DearonElensar]

At 10/30/08 09:10 AM, CronoMan wrote: Stuff

Yet people really like Lisp for AI work, which is the second oldest programming language that is still being used :)

[CronoMan]

At 10/30/08 11:12 AM, DearonElensar wrote:

At 10/30/08 09:10 AM, CronoMan wrote: Stuff

Yet people really like Lisp for AI work, which is the second oldest programming language that is still being used :)

LISP sucks as much at AI as any other language, because the structure of it is still worrying about what instructions to send to the processor
I imagine a framework with many parts and several layers of abstraction, where each layer and each part has its own function, which can be called by layers further up in the hirearchy..
I'd like it so abstract that it could actually resemble a sort of conciousness on the top, controlling the other functions of the machine, not directly, but by traversing paths it has learnt (or pre-programmed) down to the lower levels of the mechanisms

It makes more sense than to actually believe that it is possible to write intelligent programs by writing anything that only has one or two steps (LISP -> native code, LISP -> interpreter -> native code)

we're so close to the hardware it's almost embarrasing :P

It's not impossible to imitate nervous cells with a computer, nor is it impossible to create what we perceive as conciousness (as it seems that organisms are no less machines than our computers are) - it's just that with evolution over billions of years and all, we still have a shitload to learn and to figure out. And more abstraction levels is in my opinion a step in the right direction

I'm not talking about AI like a chess computer, that's not intelligence, it's an advanced calculator. same goes for any other AI you've probably ever encountered. they're so incredibly primitive I almost get embarrased when I see those bulky stupid robots people are so proud of on documentaries and stuff. I wonder if in the near future we'll look back on these robots like we look back on computers from the 50's today

And when do someone figure out a better way of making robot arms and legs than those horrifically retarded electric motors? they're ugly, noisy, slow and weak :P

on an additional sidenote, I have problems with the way they "develop" robots today, they're starting completely in the wrong place. It's like sticking the brain of a dead retarded baby cockroach in the head of a bulky, fat, ugly human.. at least we could've made it into a smart, bulky, fat, ugly human. I watched this program on robotics, and it seemed like they wrote the software in C.. not only was it a primitive language, they had to rewrite everything for each "show"
if you ask me, there's no way they're going to make any progress if they do it like that
but this might be that these people aren't really programmers, they're robotics engineers which obviously isn't the same. or there would be no way in hell you would choose C as the language of choice for this application - yeah yeah, C is great, but it sure as fuck has its problems when it comes to complex code