LiveCode Forums.

There is a discussion on the HC use list. All of the respondents there are capable LC users, or are at least very familiar with it.

There is an ongoing effort to create a modern HC. That is, a simple (simpler than LC, anyway) but modern xTalk that would allow new users to create their own software. If this sounds familiar, the rationale is that LC is so big and powerful. with such a large native vocabulary, that it may be daunting to new users. I understand this point of view and agree with it.

I had mentioned that early versions of Excel allowed the user to hide much gadgetry, reducing the number of menuItems, for example, and keep only core functionality. This not only gave the user confidence, it reduced clutter and consternation.

So why not put back userLevels? I do not know how onerous this would be at this stage, or if anyone thinks it a good idea. But I bet there is real substance to the point, that the very size of LC, (imagine that a new user just skims the dictionary to see what it contains) might well turn that person off. The similarities between LC and HC surely are conducive to such a hierarchy, the effort to implement it notwithstanding.

I would hate to lose people because they think they have to learn 2500+ new words to even start speaking the language. I am fond of telling those people that you can get started, and really get going, with 50.

Craig Newman

So why not put back userLevels?

They can't be "put back", since they were never in LiveCode. No other xTalk - not SuperCard, nor OMO, nor Gain Momentum, Plus, Toolbook, or the rest - ever implemented UserLevel. That feature was unique to HyperCard's audience and goals.

I agree that progressive disclosure can be useful in seducing people into learning certain things. But I think for all the language similarities HyperCard and LiveCode are serving fundamentally different goals. I don't know that I would say one is better than another, just different. Very different.

Like Atkinson said not long ago, even after he spoke at the LiveCode conference in San Jose, in his view the true successor to HyperCard isn't an xTalk, or any scripting language at all - it's iBooks Author.

Something Bill Appleton once said of SuperCard may apply equally well here:
"HyperCard is a multimedia authoring environment.
SuperCard is a tool you can use to build multimedia authoring environments."

Another alternate UI for the LC engine, perhaps one focused around authoring, would make a fine community project.

All of the things people have been asking for there are about UI, and in terms of the language their desire is as you noted for a subset of what LiveCode is capable of.

Uli's well respected for his excellent code, but writing an engine from scratch, even if just for one platform, is a lot work that'll consume many man-months, if not years.

Since what's requested there technically is a subset of what LC already does, this would seem an ideal opportunity to use the proven multi-platform LC engine to build the UI of their dreams. Certainly far less effort than also building an entirely new engine from scratch along with it. Extra bonus points that Windows, Linux, Android, and even Raspberry Pi come along for the ride.

Given the staggering expense involved, using LC as the foundation for this tool may not only save significant time, but in the end it may make the difference between something that ships and something that doesn't. Uli does very good work, but such a project will become very demanding before it's done.....

progressive disclosure

Ouch! That sounds like a cult's way of sucking people in before they let them know that they are required to believe that god is a big purple banana.

I don't think "progressive disclosure" is a good idea at all.

What I do think is a good idea is to have 3 interfaces:

1. Beginner.

3. Intermediate.

3. Advanced.

and let the end-user choose which one they want to use,
coupled with a set of self-study exercises tailored to each interface.

richmond62 wrote:I don't think "progressive disclosure" is a good idea at all.

Progressive disclosure is a design pattern that seeks to avoid cognitive overload for the user by presenting interface options only when they're truly needed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_disclosure
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/progre ... isclosure/
https://www.interaction-design.org/lite ... disclosure

What I do think is a good idea is to have 3 interfaces:

1. Beginner.

3. Intermediate.

3. Advanced.

and let the end-user choose which one they want to use,
coupled with a set of self-study exercises tailored to each interface.

That's an excellent example of progression disclosure.

Personally, I believe the company's first priority is the one they're presently engaged in, to refine the IDE features they have before venturing off to make new variants.

But I see value in alternative IDEs for the Community Edition, and since it's all scripting any sufficiently motivated members of the community are well suited to create it.

For myself, I've taken progressive disclosure to an extreme to craft a very different workflow for developing with the LC engine in my devolution plugin. With that I rarely see the LC IDE at all, with most of my screen occupied by the project I'm working on, and the only persistent tool a slender palette that provides quick access to tools only when I need them:
http://fourthworld.com/products/devolution/

I wouldn't advocate that approach as a solution for newcomers (on the contrary, devolution is designed with the needs of experienced devs in mind). I merely offer it as an example of how easy it can be to completely transform the LiveCode user experience.

HyperCard's UI was almost entirely hard-coded in its compiled engine. In contrast, LiveCode's IDE is entirely made with LiveCode itself. In fact, having worked with nearly every other xTalk ever made, I can think of only one other, Sybase Gain Momentum, that had enough confidence in its engine to build its entire UI in it.

Anyone looking to create an xTalk environment that emphasizes a subset of LiveCode's capabilities will find it easier to do with the LiveCode engine than just about any other possibility.

I agree that version 8 is too daunting for new users. For all practical reasons, I am going to stick with 6,7.11 or 7.1.4 with my students. I do not see userlevels being implemented in any time soon and anything else would be a workaround. (It seems that the LiveCode environment seems mostly directed to experienced programmers or those with some knowledge of programming )

When those versions go away, we will re-evaluate the choice of languages for teaching beginning programming. The environment is changing rapidly and with the emphasis on programming, computer science and education, new languages are showing up all the time. As it is now, LiveCode is just a stepping stone to Python or Java and not an end language. Until it gets more respect, more attention and a larger user base, it will remain that way. It is a good starter language.

Newbie4 wrote:For all practical reasons, I am going to stick with 6,7.11 or 7.1.4 with my students. I do not see userlevels being implemented in any time soon and anything else would be a workaround. (It seems that the LiveCode environment seems mostly directed to experienced programmers or those with some knowledge of programming )

True, it's extremely unlikely LiveCode would be the first xTalk since HyperCard to support userLevels. But then again, if you're teaching scripting that's User Level 5 anyway, which is effectively the one user level LC offers.

It may be helpful to hear how Max Shafer and other teachers use LiveCode. Max has had even young grade school kids deliver apps for iPads, so there seems to be a pedagological method that works well enough. Maybe drop a note in the EDU Outreach forum?:
http://forums.livecode.com/viewforum.php?f=107

When those versions go away...

Already happened, at least in as much as with v5, v4, and any earlier version. None of them have "gone away" in the sense that they're still downloadable (all the way back to v4.5), but as the team has been telling us for nearly a year, when v8.0 is premiered v6 and v7 will reach EOL and will no longer be maintained or supported.

V8.0 was released last week, and now the team has resumed a more normal (and far less expensive) development path with only one currently-supported version.

As it is now, LiveCode is just a stepping stone to Python or Java and not an end language. Until it gets more respect, more attention and a larger user base, it will remain that way. It is a good starter language.

Yes, it would be wonderful to see some of the world's largest corporations poouring millions of dollars of development into LiveCode as they have with Java and Python. I hope that happens.

In the meantime, there is a valuable contribution LiveCode brings to the world of great programming languages, a three-fold combination I haven't seen elsehwere:

- High-level scripting language
- with GUI objects as an inherent part of the language
- running on seven platforms

I can find or two of those in many alternatives, but not all three.

These same reasons why LiveCode is attractive to software entrepreneurs can make it equally attractive to those crafting CS curricula as well. After all, most CS lessons begin on paper, and then move through Scratch, and then jump up rather significantly in terms of cognitive requirements to go directly to Python or in some cases even Java.

It's possible to make tools with LiveCode that augment or even replace the paper and Scratch portions of the learning sequence, and then move on to simple scripting, all in one toolkit.

Moreover, LiveCode offers a much shorter path between "I want to make this" and "Hey, look what I made!" than either Java or Python. This is especially true for GUI apps, and shortening that distance is critical for keeping young learners engaged.

We have quite a number of educators who've had good success teaching with LiveCode, including Max Shafer, Devin Asay, Lloyd Rieber, Claire Bradin Sisken, Marc Sisken, Mark Rauterkus, Bill Waldman, Tore Nilsen, and many more.

In fact, Claire's been doing some great work lately teaching LiveCode around the world - here's her latest adventure, in Bangladesh:
http://play.cloh.org/2016/05/08/teacher ... worldwide/

For all practical reasons, I am going to stick with 6,7.11 or 7.1.4 with my students.

Well I can think of lots of reasons for that:

1. Livecode 8, inspite of being termed "stable" is pretty shoogly.

2. The widgets, clever though they be, will merely serve as distractions to learners who are trying
to get to grips with programming-qua-programming rather than prepackaged boxes of tricks.

3. 7.1.4 works cross-platform; Windows, Macintosh, Linux 32-bit and 64-bit in pretty well the same way,
while 8.0 is inconsistent cross-platform.

I, for instance, run a school that runs 100% Linux (Xubuntu 14.04 LTS 32-bit at the moment), but
90% of my programming pupils run Windows XP/7/8/10 at home. The simple fact that they can bung the work they do at school
on a USB-Flash drive and work on it at home, and then bring it back at the ir next class is INVALUABLE.

I agree with you. LiveCode is an ideal language to use in the schools. You will find isolated cases where a few people are making a difference but LiveCode is certainly not taking the world by storm.

I have had good success with it in my classes, as I have said in other posts. In the latest U.S. Congressional App Challenge, the students swept all places in both of our Congressional Districts http://donnaedwards.house.gov/index.php ... &Itemid=18 and https://hoyer.house.gov/press-releases/ ... challenge/. In fact, our school had the most entries by far, of any school in the U.S. and for any district. That is LiveCode in action!!

My comments were intended more for the company. Despite all of the efforts of a few people, LiveCode is not gaining any traction in the educational or professional programming arenas. Other decisions need to be made if they want to grow and prosper.

LiveCode is not gaining any traction in the educational or ... arenas.

Frankly I see little motivation on their part re the educational sector.

They are a strange lot; although they claim they listen, there is very little evidence they do in several areas, one being
the educational one.

Certainly Livecode COULD be the teaching language/package of choice right across Europe and North America
(even if not elsewhere), but at present it is either C++ or the bay "programming" toys; one far too, unnecessasrily
complicated, the other dumbed down to the point of uselessness.

I have been banging on about THIS for about 15 years, with little or no effect.

richmond62 wrote:

For all practical reasons, I am going to stick with 6,7.11 or 7.1.4 with my students.

Well I can think of lots of reasons for that:

1. Livecode 8, inspite of being termed "stable" is pretty shoogly.

True, as with any major release of any software (need we list the issues with Apple's iOS? <g>), LC 8.0 has a few regressions. But it also has several hundreds fixes not found in earlier versions. For my own work it's more stable than v6 and v7, far more performant than v7, and looks better on Linux and Mac than any version I've used before. If you find regressions please report them. A new build is in development now, and critical items not reported earlier may make it in rather soon.

2. The widgets, clever though they be, will merely serve as distractions to learners who are trying
to get to grips with programming-qua-programming rather than prepackaged boxes of tricks.

Binary operators too, and maybe postGres, imageData parsing, sockets, and quite a few other features we've been enjoying for years.

Having advanced capabilities isn't a bug, it's a feature. If this is a problem specific to teaching, it's easily solvable: just don't start a beginning course with the most advanced features.

3. 7.1.4 works cross-platform; Windows, Macintosh, Linux 32-bit and 64-bit in pretty well the same way,
while 8.0 is inconsistent cross-platform.

It's definitely a challenge being pretty much the only scriptable GUI tool attempting something even close to seamlessness across seven platforms. What have you seen in v8 that's less consistent across platforms than in earlier versions?

I, for instance, run a school that runs 100% Linux (Xubuntu 14.04 LTS 32-bit at the moment), but
90% of my programming pupils run Windows XP/7/8/10 at home. The simple fact that they can bung the work they do at school
on a USB-Flash drive and work on it at home, and then bring it back at the ir next class is INVALUABLE.

Very useful indeed. I know a lot of people, including myself, who move LiveCode stack files across OSes via thumb drive. Still works for me in v8 as well as any earlier build. What's not working for you there?

Newbie4 wrote:I have had good success with it in my classes, as I have said in other posts. In the latest U.S. Congressional App Challenge, the students swept all places in both of our Congressional Districts http://donnaedwards.house.gov/index.php ... &Itemid=18 and https://hoyer.house.gov/press-releases/ ... challenge/. In fact, our school had the most entries by far, of any school in the U.S. and for any district. That is LiveCode in action!!

Supercool! Congrats. You might consider dropping a note to heather AT livecode.com to see about writing a blog post about that project. I'd like to read it.

richmond62 wrote:

LiveCode is not gaining any traction in the educational or ... arenas.

Frankly I see little motivation on their part re the educational sector.

I think the motivation is self-evident. What you're not seeing is as much execution as you'd like, at least from the core dev team. And given the daily nose-to-the-keyboard commitment they've been demonstrating with development, it's not surprising that their EDU outreach is a lower priority for their engineering staff. They have managed to get LC adopted across much of Scotland K-12, and they provide resources for a wide range of educators who request them. But for the most part, the engineering we keep after them to do is very demanding work, and they don't quite have the budget tools like Python enjoy, where many of the full-time salaries for contributors are paid by multinational giants like Google.

So in the spirit of exchange that makes open source work, the dev team does what they can to do what they do best, and those of us so inclined in the community can do what we can to do what we do best. For many that includes teaching with LiveCode, and presenting results of that teaching at conferences, and writing blogs about those successes.

And bit by bit, the collective efforts of the community to indeed make a difference. Every time someone lets others know about the successes they've had with LiveCode, it makes it that much easier for anyone who hears the story to decide to give it a go.

In some ways it's far more meaningful than just another company peddling its wares. When success stories are shared by other teachers, hobbyists, entrepreneurs, and anyone else doing good work with LC, it's far more compelling to read than any advert a company could offer.

When success stories are shared by other teachers, hobbyists, entrepreneurs, and anyone else doing good work with LC, it's far more compelling to read than any advert a company could offer.

Fair point there.

Well;as Livecode have now produced a Community Edition page, an Education-focused page is obviously
the next step, so that a lot of those success stories are somewhat less buried in odd corners of the
website.

richmond62 wrote:

When success stories are shared by other teachers, hobbyists, entrepreneurs, and anyone else doing good work with LC, it's far more compelling to read than any advert a company could offer.

Fair point there.

Well;as Livecode have now produced a Community Edition page, an Education-focused page is obviously
the next step, so that a lot of those success stories are somewhat less buried in odd corners of the
website.

We're working on it. LiveCode.org has only been the dedicated community site for a few days now, But we're putting together the tools and teams to expand it, and EDU outreach will definitely be a part of that.

richmond62 wrote:What I do think is a good idea is to have 3 interfaces:

1. Beginner.

3. Intermediate.

3. Advanced.

and let the end-user choose which one they want to use,
coupled with a set of self-study exercises tailored to each interface.

What would each of those levels do?