scratch-www VS processing

I've always been fascinated by the technology. I spent many hors playing video games and the first dive into the world of development was when I had to code a game on Scratch. The excercise looked pretty easy: Create a Tamagotchi-like game. Let me tell you - It wasn't easy at all for someone of a young age! There were many things that I needed to pay attention to: Things I have never heard of before!

References: Scratch Blockly Google Teachable Machine LEGO Spike Prime

I would be surprised if your first program was C++? Specifically, getting a decent C++ toolchain that can produce a meaningful program is not a small thing?

I'm not sure where I feel about languages made for teaching and whatnot, yet; but I would be remiss if I didn't encourage my kids to use https://scratch.mit.edu/ for their early programming. I remember early computers would boot into a BASIC prompt and I could transcribe some programs to make screensavers and games. LOGO was not uncommon to explore fractals and general path finding ideas.

Even beyond games and screensavers, MS Access (or any similar offering, FoxPro, as an example) was easily more valuable for learning to program interfaces to data than I'm used to seeing from many lower level offerings. Our industries shunning of interface builders has done more to make it difficult to get kids programming than I think we admit.

A good place to start with kids that age is Scratch: https://scratch.mit.edu/

I think going straight to Switch would likely be a tall order. I’d start him off with something where he can be successful right away, writing something he can play on his own computer or share with friends easily.

Scratch[0] is often used to start kids out with programming. He may already use it in school, I know my nephew does, who is around the same age. I made a silly little game in Scratch about a year ago to share with my nephews[1], to try and inspire them a bit. The oldest one quickly went into the code and started tweaking the variables I had set to control things like speed and randomness to make it more chaotic. It’s a good way to learn the concepts of variables, loops, sprites, hit boxes, etc without getting bogged down with the complexity of syntax or a professional game engine. It’s also in the browser, so he can easily share with friends and have them play it, or fork it.

After that, maybe look to something like Godot[2]. It’s free and open source, so he doesn’t have to worry about licensing and all that nonsense that a 12 year old shouldn’t have to think about. I briefly looked and saw some videos of people running the Godot engine on the Switch, but I don’t know what’s involved in that.

I wouldn’t get too tied to a console when learning. Rumors of the Switch 2 are floating around, and who knows, that could mean a whole different path. Starting on the computer avoids this problem, and other huddles. Then if he likes the act of game dev and learning those things, he can cross the bridge to whatever the current console is, if that’s the direction he wants to head.

[0] https://scratch.mit.edu/

[1] https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/733627274/

[2] https://godotengine.org/

For anyone interested in working on visual programming professionally, we use it for creation in Rec Room in a system I built called Circuits https://blog.recroom.com/posts/2021/5/03/the-circuits-handbo...

It has a real place among novice programmers. We even have some experts who use it as a fun alternative to writing text. I don't see visual systems as an effective way to replace everything us experts are doing but they've gotten a ton of mileage in the jr. and learning domain. Scratch (https://scratch.mit.edu/) being another obvious example.

See the email in my profile if you are interested in roles and I'll see if we can find something that fits.

After some days, my sister, who was in class 2 then, came to me and showed me the first program she wrote. It was not a code-based program but a visual program using software called Scratch 3.0. It is similar to NODE-RED but with a different approach, focusing more on programming than wiring together hardware devices. It contains all the node blocks needed to build a simple program without any coding knowledge and is very user-friendly for children new to computer programming.

LiveCode is about the closest literal logical successor to HyperCard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiveCode?wprov=sfti1

That said, I think Scratch is a better learning environment these days and you can develop workable apps in the style of HyperCard. There are plenty of tutorials, documentation, and examples to work from.

https://scratch.mit.edu

This is a nice comment and speaks to the notion that every medium has its own characteristic feel even is not "better" by some metric (e.g. vinyl vs CDs, vs cassettes, vs live radio, vs mp3, etc.).

A similar feeling of immediacy without any intervening concerns is hacking away at a Processing [https://processing.org/] sketch. In some sense it's the complete opposite of retro computing, but it engenders similar experiences. Such as a programming novice typing in a few numbers and being amazed that they've immediately made something interactive and colorful, and temptingly close to being called a game.

In high school the first languages and tools I remember using were things like Turing, Processing, GreenFoot and BlueJ. All of which were learning tools, and with the exception of Turing, were Java abstractions with the main focus on graphical programming. These tools allowed me to do some pretty cool things, very quickly. These early experience are really what inspired my interest.

Some more context: Ben Fry posted a thread on X in 10/2023[1] where he announced and explained his decision to resign from the Processing Foundation.

Seems like Processing got left out from expenses despite their large budget, running against their original reason to start the foundation: “I was soon shocked to learn that the Foundation spent nearly $800,000 last year. $0 of that went to Processing 4. This year, the proposed Foundation budget is around $1.2 million. But for Processing, there is budget for just two people: one developer, one community lead. You know what that sounds like? The reason we started a Foundation in the first place. Two people is not enough for any of the Processing software projects (i.e. anything that lives at a http://processing.org domain.)”

I wonder if most of the money went into p5 or the new website or whatever, but it made me a bit sad to see that the original Processing got left behind. It is what got me into programming and there are still lots of good reasons to choose it over p5. I can, however, understand if they prioritised p5 due to the rise of web apps and mobile devices, sharability, JS being everywhere and so on. Maybe it’s nostalgia, but it just doesn’t bring me as much joy as the original.

[1]: https://x.com/ben_fry/status/1709400641456501020

The Processing Foundation is thrilled to announce the open call for pr05 (pronounced “pros”), a new grant and mentorship initiative designed to support the professional growth of early to mid-career software developers through hands-on involvement in open-source projects. This is a unique opportunity to grow as a developer while making a tangible impact on software projects used by millions of creatives, artists, educators, and students globally. The topic of this year’s program is 'New Beginnings', focusing on supporting projects that will enhance and solidify the Processing and p5.js ecosystems and help lay strong foundations for their futures.

reply

I disagree. There are so many creative tools that are now online that you can access from your browser that were not envisioned in the original web. It is obviously true that not EVERY website is about creation (but to expect that seems unreasonable?), but even Wikipedia is a collaborative project.

Examples include products from big vendors like Adobe's Photoshop, to smaller products like SketchUp, to more indy generative art tools like https://processing.org and Strudel (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39924210).

Would processing[0] be a good fit? It's designed to be easy to use and learn but powerful enough for professional use. Very quick to get cool stuff moving on a screen and the syntax is Java with a streamlined editing environment.

[0] https://processing.org/