I’m very much guessing that this is just supposed to be a type of pseudocode given the context and vagueness of it.
It’s a big reason why I really dont like pseudocode as instruction to people learning the basics of what programming is. It made more sense 20 years ago when programming languages were on a whole a lot more esoteric and less plain text, but now with simple languages like Python there’s simply little reason to not just write Python code or whatever.
I took an intro to programming class in College and the single thing I got dinged on the most is “incorrect pseudocode”, which was either too formal and close to real code or too casual and close to plain English.
It’s not a great system. We really need to get rid of it as a practice
I think you’re missing the forest for the trees here pretty heavily.
Yes, Python has some goofy aspects about managing it while performing high level, in depth tasks.
This is a post and a comment chain about pseudocode being taught to people who likely just learned what a “programming language” was several weeks ago. Essentially no one taking the GCSE knows what “bash-like scripts” even means.
Reminds me of 7th grade math class, chapter on estimating. Assignment was “Estimate the following values” with problems like 42+28=? or 14*3=?
One of them was 6*7=? Which having memorized my times tables in 4th grade like they told me to, I knew off the top of my head that it’s 42. I wrote that. And it was marked wrong because I was too precise.
I’m very much guessing that this is just supposed to be a type of pseudocode given the context and vagueness of it.
It’s a big reason why I really dont like pseudocode as instruction to people learning the basics of what programming is. It made more sense 20 years ago when programming languages were on a whole a lot more esoteric and less plain text, but now with simple languages like Python there’s simply little reason to not just write Python code or whatever.
I took an intro to programming class in College and the single thing I got dinged on the most is “incorrect pseudocode”, which was either too formal and close to real code or too casual and close to plain English.
It’s not a great system. We really need to get rid of it as a practice
Especially since python is right there.
I mean once you get beyond bash-like scripts python is esoteric as fuck, adding oop to what is essentially a shell is a terrible idea
That said, there’s plenty of languages with good syntax that is still good when you get into more complex stuff (modern C#, scala, kotlin and more)
The only thing esoteric about python is the bolted-on typing and anything behind a double underscore.
So yeah, it’s there, but in front of the curtain it’s practically pseudo code.
I think you’re missing the forest for the trees here pretty heavily.
Yes, Python has some goofy aspects about managing it while performing high level, in depth tasks.
This is a post and a comment chain about pseudocode being taught to people who likely just learned what a “programming language” was several weeks ago. Essentially no one taking the GCSE knows what “bash-like scripts” even means.
What part(s) of python do you think is esoteric?
Wut
Reminds me of 7th grade math class, chapter on estimating. Assignment was “Estimate the following values” with problems like 42+28=? or 14*3=?
One of them was 6*7=? Which having memorized my times tables in 4th grade like they told me to, I knew off the top of my head that it’s 42. I wrote that. And it was marked wrong because I was too precise.
In the 90s my high school used Pascal. That seems reasonable if you only want to teach procedural