Pygame

Drop in for a chat and a cup of tea

30 posts   Page 2 of 2   1, 2
by Jaseman » Tue Mar 20, 2012 5:37 pm
I don't know why you want to restrict yourself to an out-dated version.  Presumably the newer version addresses problems, makes life easier, and offers new features.

Unless there's an obvious disadvantage, I would go with whatever is the current stable version, but perhaps not jumping too fast onto buggy beta versions.
Posts: 302
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:59 pm
by holdenweb » Thu Mar 29, 2012 9:07 am
liz said:


Pygame"s definitely something we"ll be bundling. We"re arguing about whether we prefer the Python 2 series (on the basis of how the Hello World program works, would you believe), but you"ll definitely see one or the other on there.


If you'd like some gratuitous advice, I would suggest majoring on Python 2.7 right now. By all means offer Python 3.x as an option (though as someone has already pointed out there are even PyGame problems adopting too recent a version of that), since it is doubtless the future. We anticipated the knee in Python 2/3 adoption would occur about five years after Python 3's first appearance. This would probably make 3.4 or 3.5 a good time to move entirely away from Python 2 in two or three years' time.

At present most available Python software is available least problematically for Python 2. Many packages have already migrated and are available for both versions. Very little is only available for Python 3 only. Learning to move from Python 2 to Python 3 is not that big a step for a student (or for that matter a teacher) as the environments are very similar.
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:57 am
by holdenweb » Thu Mar 29, 2012 9:10 am
holdenweb said:


liz said:


Pygame"s definitely something we"ll be bundling. We"re arguing about whether we prefer the Python 2 series (on the basis of how the Hello World program works, would you believe), but you"ll definitely see one or the other on there.


If you"d like some gratuitous advice, I would suggest majoring on Python 2.7 right now. By all means offer Python 3.x as an option (though as someone has already pointed out there are even PyGame problems adopting too recent a version of that), since it is doubtless the future. We anticipated the knee in Python 2/3 adoption would occur about five years after Python 3"s first appearance. This would probably make 3.4 or 3.5 a good time to move entirely away from Python 2 in two or three years" time.

At present most available Python software is available least problematically for Python 2. Many packages have already migrated and are available for both versions. Very little is only available for Python 3 only. Learning to move from Python 2 to Python 3 is not that big a step for a student (or for that matter a teacher) as the environments are very similar.


By the way, there is very definitely something funky about the way the system is doubling apostrophes in posts. Makes me think that there are two levels of SQL quoting going on or something like that. Probably not a major annoyance, but I'm a geek. Sorry.
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:57 am
by Jim Manley » Thu Mar 29, 2012 10:58 am
Given that it's realistically going to be Fall 2013 before R-Pi systems are going to be available in sufficient numbers in time for typical school budget planning/acquisition cycles, we might as well just go with 3.x.  In addition, there's the ramp-up time needed to train just the teachers with science/math backgrounds, much less the majority of teachers teaching science/math who aren't as strong in those subjects education-wise or interest-wise.

The latter can be a real impediment to effective learning - kids can readily tell when a teacher is just going through the motions with unfamiliar material about which they're not genuinely excited.  By the time that latter group will receive training, even Python 2.7 will be approaching end-of-life (for bug fixes and support) and the most-used libraries will have all been ported to 3.x.  We don't want to confuse the less technically-inclined teachers with multiple versions, at all costs, or they won't be very helpful in achieving our goals.  If kids encounter 2.x legacy code when they're out in the real world, by that time, they should be well-versed enough to be able to accommodate the vagaries between various versions (even within 2.x and 3.x).
The best things in life aren't things ... but, a Pi comes pretty darned close! :D
"Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire." -- W.B. Yeats
In theory, theory & practice are the same - in practice, they aren't!!!
User avatar
Posts: 1357
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 8:41 pm
Location: SillyCon Valley, California, USA
by mlepage » Sat Jun 30, 2012 10:42 pm
LÖVE (www.love2d.org) would be an excellent choice, for ease of use and learning. It uses Lua not Python, which is a much cleaner and simpler programming language. I have finally received my Raspberry Pi and am looking to do some LÖVE programming for it. I understand LÖVE does run, if built. It would be nice to get it included in the repos (perhaps available via apt-get). I think kids would enjoy LÖVE a lot, and learn from it.
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:58 am