From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.

Most of the screen shots in this article seem to be from a copyrighted program. I'm thinking of rerunning the examples in KTurtle and then exporting the graphic. Thus, the images won't have a copyright on them and they will look better because there won't be any window border ect. Let me know what you think. --Mblaze

Why is the Spanish version tacked onto the end of this article? Doesn't it belong in the Spanish version of Wikipedia? --Frecklefoot

Yes, it does - I've removed the text again. For info the Spanish Wikipedia is at [1], I'd transfer the text there myself, but wouldn't have a clue what I was writing! -- sannse 14:44 May 13, 2003 (UTC)

I have spent many years using LOGO with students and I am obviously pleased that LOGO has got an entry, but I am worried that it written from the observers point of view rather than that of a participant. It falls into the trap of just mentioning Turtle graphics and nothing about the language its unique control structures, its IO subsystem, and its List processing power. There is no link to Brian Harveys seminal 3 volume work or George Mills MSWLogo (open source). There is no link to the LOGO list on Yahoo Groups etc-- all of which would be known to a participant.

I have written extensively on LOGO as I have discovered more and links to ythese articles are at http://www.rutter.uklinux.net/_sch/c03logo.html. I would suggest that some of the articles in the first column could be wikified and insetert as a top level in the article, embedding the work already present.

I would then present the URL to members of the LOGO list (some who are far more able than me) for comment, modification and addition.

Cooperatively yours

Clem Rutter Rochester, Kent

2 Dec 2003- As there were no negative comments, I have done what I suggested above.

Contents 1 Pictures please! 2 Introductory paragraph 3 Non-programmer info 3.1 How About A LogoWiki? -- by Alan Kay 3.2 The Prolog programmer?

[edit] Pictures please!

Could somebody with a working logo system run the example scripts and upload images of the results? Populus 00:02, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Introductory paragraph

The intro to this article need some serious work. Who is Papert? What is LISP? We come in seeming to know these concepts. Sorry, the article I came from didn't tell me, and I don't want to go to another article before reading this one.

Let's please have some context established before we dive in.

Radagast 02:45, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)

I have exactly the same comment: The very first sentence says:

Papert used LISP but changed the syntax so it is much easier to read.

Who or what the heck is "Papert"? It seems like there used to be sentence preceding it which has disappeared. Since it's been 8 days since Radagast made his/her posting, I guess nobody is reading this Talk page, but if someone is who knows something about Logo, please illuminate us! --Sewing 05:43, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Well, the LEGO feature article on the Main Page explained that "Papert" is a "Dr. Seymour Papert"; I wikified "Seymour Papert" and discovered an article on him...rewrote the opening sentence accordingly. --Sewing 05:50, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I was going to correct a typo in the section Comparisons Between Logo and Pascal, but then I continued reading it and I feel it really has little to do with the article, especially considering Pascal is a dying language (meaning the reader is less likely to draw anything useful from it, not that Pascal should be ignored!). Much of the content in there has little to do with either language — "trees are more fun"? I don't rate a language by how fun it is to construct a tree in it. While there is some useful information here (for instance how easily Logo handles recursive data structures), it would be best said elsewhere in the article, in my opinion. For these reasons, I have removed the section comparing Logo to Pascal.

--Furrykef 22:03, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'd also like to see fewer general comparisons to Pascal in the article ("this is like a Pascal procedure..."), but since I never worked with Logo myself, I don't really feel qualified. (Of course, I feel it best to avoid language comparisons at all, but if they must be made, I'd prefer they'd be made with more commonly-used languages; C and Java would be good.)

--Furrykef 22:11, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I don't really see why we should favor currently popular languages. Wikipedia is not a textbook. We shouldn't make assumptions like far more readers tend to know Java than Pascal. If you are writing a textbook, it is probably a good idea to pick a currently commonly used language to describe things but it is not the case here. I agree the section seem rather irrelevant. So why not separate it? I am going to create an article Comparison of Logo to Pascal. -- Taku 22:21, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

Clem Rutter replies: When i rewote the LOGO article, it was mainly bits about turtle graphics (see above). I attempted to leave everything that was not wrong, and embed it in an article that reflected the three aspects of LOGO (the child, the Serious student of Computer Science, and the educationalist that uses LOGO in a constructionist educational paradigm). The intended audience will be all three of these groups.I have written about Logo, and used it as a teacher with 9 yr olds to 18, I have used it to write two serious programs.

You need a frame work to start from. I looked at a format used for the article on C. which I speak, and in the end cloned much of the text from an article I had written on Logo for Pascal speakers, hence I used the 'Pascal' as an abbreviation for 'block structured functional languages.

Though I program in C, I teach programming in Pascal which I still find is more commonly used 'block structured functional language' in academic publishing though in recent years more has been written using a OO paradigm.

Logo keywords are more similar to Pascal than C. Concepts such as i++ or ++i are alien to Logo. Java is a language from a different generation and pardigm. More C== than C.

But there is no real issue-the holy war exists between C and Pascal (Wikipedia on C), I just feel the article would be more verbose if comparisons were made with C. I do feel that a comparison is necessary- or the article becomes impossible verbose, or trite.

I left the Comparisons with Pascal in because- it is a question that a lot of beginners ask- I didn't make a separate page because I didn't see it as more than a paragraph- certainly not an article- each to his own.

The forthcoming issues from the Logo community could be comparisons of differing implementation of Logo.

[edit] Non-programmer info

I came to this article from the Microworlds article. I am writing a critic of the Microworlds webapp for educational use. I do not have an programming background and when I came to the bit about the turtle was quite confused. Could someone help out us non-programmers and tell us what the devil the turtle is? Thank you for your attention. Shongzah 20:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

• The turtle has nothing to do with programming. It's a unique feature of Logo. Perhaps the article doesn't explain properly what the turtle is. I will add a paragraph. —EatMyShortz 10:08, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How About A LogoWiki? -- by Alan Kay

It really bothers me that the Logo examples in this article can't be tried out in 2006 (given that this was easy on an Apple ][ in 1979)! Here's an example of a LogoWiki. The Logo interpreter is in JavaScript so the examples can be run directly and without any reference to a server. When save is pushed, the edits get sent back to a wiki server. This is just a quick demo right now so don't bother to beat on it too much.

[edit] The Prolog programmer?

What is with this article and Pascal? On at least 5 occasions, it describes things with respect to "a Pascal programmer", giving examples in Pascal (which is OK), saying when Pascal programmers will "be surprised" and "be familiar" with concepts (this is not OK because it's meant to be for a general audience), and at one point, even describing generic programming concepts of selection and iteration as "the standard Pascal controls". —EatMyShortz 10:08, 7 November 2006 (UTC)