Based on my confusion related to the recent assignment, I thought I would start a post that would shed some light on this topic and new realm of literary/coding controversy. In the reading related to the introduction of this coding experience, there were a couple of things that stood out to me. The statement that the higher level the code, the closer it is to natural language. I was wondering if any of you felt this way. We have happily and intensely emerged ourselves with two coding challenges in two separate interfaces.
Before I engaged in the python exercises, I was offended that code was not considered intellectual language or academia. I have dabbled in languages over the past 13 years and feel as if coding adds a level of understanding and respect to the digital world. More people should be exposed to this backend of the inter webs. The mention of Life on the Screen by Sherry Turkle reminds me of how I felt about the privacy of the guts of the computers when they first came out. When I read this book about a year ago, I was a bit angry that we weren’t allowed to peek into the backyard of most of that mastery. Now there are many ways to experience the structure and skeleton of any and all digital interfaces. The only thing that is missing is the ability to know what was going on in the mind of the person building it. For instance, the python tutorial and structure of it. If we compare the language and back story of code academy to the python tutorial that we did this week, what does it tell us. Why such different approaches, language, direction, tips, formats, etc. ? I understand that different people have different visions, but I’m wondering why they chose that certain vision for something that they love so much. Just something that I’ve been bouncing around in my noggin’ since I finished python. I thought I would burden you with the pain of my intellectual struggle as well. I hope to open dialogue with all of you wonderful minds, in order to embrace my own struggle. Thanks