Do we have educational IDEs?

[hiwa]

I have seen number of scenes where IDEs are nothing but serious
stumbling blocks for Java programming beginners. I think that is
because, basically, IDE is designed as a tool for professional,
not a learning aid.

But, if their main career tool should be an IDE when they became
a young professional, I feel IDEs with some educational cares
implemented should be preferred to a plain editor and command
line compiling cycles.

What is your opinion about this? And, do we already have IDEs
for educational purposes?

 

[Kevin McMurtrie]

I have seen number of scenes where IDEs are nothing but serious
stumbling blocks for Java programming beginners. I think that is
because, basically, IDE is designed as a tool for professional,
not a learning aid.

But, if their main career tool should be an IDE when they became
a young professional, I feel IDEs with some educational cares
implemented should be preferred to a plain editor and command
line compiling cycles.

What is your opinion about this? And, do we already have IDEs
for educational purposes?

Eclipse 3.1 is a very helpful IDE. It has smart completion suggestion
menus, realtime syntax checking, automatic background compilation,
detailed error reporting with menus of suggested fixes, class hierarchy
mapping, JavaDoc tooltips, refactoring, reference and implementation
searching, generation of delegation methods, and local and remote
debugging.

It's free, open source, and cross platform. The only cost of using it
is that it needs a very powerful system to be responsive.

 

[Guest]

I have seen number of scenes where IDEs are nothing but serious
stumbling blocks for Java programming beginners. I think that is
because, basically, IDE is designed as a tool for professional,
not a learning aid.

But, if their main career tool should be an IDE when they became
a young professional, I feel IDEs with some educational cares
implemented should be preferred to a plain editor and command
line compiling cycles.

What is your opinion about this? And, do we already have IDEs
for educational purposes?

Yes, BlueJ.

 

[Steve Reeves]

I'm learning Java2 using JCreator (www.jcreator.com)

The LE version is free, written in C++ and so is responsive. It's nice
easy and straightforward - just what I need when I'm learning.

I did download the netBeans things initially - had no idea what I was
doing - scared me to death. Jcreator and no doubt the other suggestions
in this thread are ideal to learn with.

HTH
Steve

 

[Chris Uppal]

And, do we already have IDEs

for educational purposes?

Eclipse 3.1 is a very helpful IDE. It has [list of features deleted]

It is also huge, confusing, full of "advanced" features, and is completely
lacking in features that would help anyone to learn (with the arguable
exception of auto-completion). IMO it is not even /slightly/ suitable for
beginners[*].

For the OP, BlueJ /is/ designed for beginners. More specifically, it is
designed for use by people who are learning to program, and learning how to
think OO. I've never taught, with or without BlueJ, so I can't recommend it
from personal experience, but the approach they take looks extremely promising
to me.

-- chris

([*] I'm not so sure that it's particularly suitable for anyone else either. I
use it myself -- as the least bad option available within my budget -- but I
don't like it much)

 

[Thomas Weidenfeller]

I have seen number of scenes where IDEs are nothing but serious
stumbling blocks for Java programming beginners. I think that is
because, basically, IDE is designed as a tool for professional,
not a learning aid.

But, if their main career tool should be an IDE when they became
a young professional, I feel IDEs with some educational cares
implemented should be preferred to a plain editor and command
line compiling cycles.

What is your opinion about this? And, do we already have IDEs
for educational purposes?

I am one of these people you deeply believe that people should learn the
basics. This includes handling an editor, a compiler and some build
files. I deeply mistrust "programmers" who can't even find a compiler
command line switch.

It is for the same reason I don't trust craftsmen who don't know how to
handle basic tools of their trade. My car doesn't get serviced by
someone who can't handle a screwdriver but does everything exclusively
with an air wrench, does yours?

I am not saying that IDEs are bad, just that a career-programmer should
know more than just how to click in an IDE.

/Thomas

 

[Ross Bamford]

Eclipse 3.1 is a very helpful IDE. It has [list of features deleted]

It is also huge, confusing, full of "advanced" features, and is completely
lacking in features that would help anyone to learn (with the arguable
exception of auto-completion). IMO it is not even /slightly/ suitable for
beginners[*].

IMO auto-complete is responsible for more poor programmers than any
other single feature of modern IDEs. When you're starting out you learn
by getting it wrong and it interferes with that.

I'm still to be convinced there is a suitable replacement for an decent
editor (like <plug>JEdit</plug>) and Sun JDK. These skills can be
applied anywhere later on.

 

[Steve Horsley]

I have seen number of scenes where IDEs are nothing but serious
stumbling blocks for Java programming beginners. I think that is
because, basically, IDE is designed as a tool for professional,
not a learning aid.

But, if their main career tool should be an IDE when they became
a young professional, I feel IDEs with some educational cares
implemented should be preferred to a plain editor and command
line compiling cycles.

What is your opinion about this? And, do we already have IDEs
for educational purposes?

BlueJ was written explicitly for teaching java language and OO
thinking. It does what's needed but is simple enough that it
doesn't "get in the way".

Have a look at their web site www.bluej.org.

Steve

 

[googmeister]

Personally, I favor a simple text editor like JEdit and the command
line
for novices. For an educational IDE, take a look at Dr. Java or BlueJ.

 

[Patricia Shanahan]

Thomas Weidenfeller wrote:
....

I am one of these people you deeply believe that people
should learn the basics. This includes handling an
editor, a compiler and some build files. I deeply
mistrust "programmers" who can't even find a compiler
command line switch.

....

The problem with this is deciding the limits of "the
basics". For example, you don't include assembly language
programming. Why not? It certainly contributes to a deeper
understanding of programming than writing only in a high
level language.

What are your criteria for selecting "the basics"?

Patricia

 

[Chris Uppal]

IMO auto-complete is responsible for more poor programmers than any
other single feature of modern IDEs. When you're starting out you learn
by getting it wrong and it interferes with that.

I'm inclined to agree, but it does depend on a number of factors. For
instance, the Java class library is pretty huge, and it just isn't possible to
learn enough of it for any of it to make sense in isolation, until /after/
you've done some programming -- but how to do that programming if you know
nothing about the class library ? Autocomplete /may/ (IMO) help to get over
that stage by, in effect, providing training wheels for the wobbling
programmer-to-be.

I'm still to be convinced there is a suitable replacement for an decent
editor (like <plug>JEdit</plug>) and Sun JDK. These skills can be
applied anywhere later on.

Where the <insert editor of choice here> + JDK approach fails (or rather, where
it risks failure) is that it doesn't teach /objects/. If all you are doing is
writing code, then it's unlikely that you'll ever think about anything except
code. The BlueJ IDE is uniquely (in the Java world) aimed at teaching OO by
providing "real" access to live objects. That (IMO) makes a difference in
kind.

I'm reluctant to claim too much for BlueJ because -- although I know what an
enormous difference it makes to work with live objects -- I'm not entirely
convinced that BlueJ does provide an experience of objects that's rich
/enough/, although they've certainly done a reasonable job within limits set by
the JVM.

-- chris

 

[Bill Tschumy]

I have seen number of scenes where IDEs are nothing but serious
stumbling blocks for Java programming beginners. I think that is
because, basically, IDE is designed as a tool for professional,
not a learning aid.

But, if their main career tool should be an IDE when they became
a young professional, I feel IDEs with some educational cares
implemented should be preferred to a plain editor and command
line compiling cycles.

What is your opinion about this? And, do we already have IDEs
for educational purposes?

I designed Jurtle as an educational IDE. It is very simple to use and uses a
built-in tutorial and Turtle Graphics (a.la. Logo) for teaching the basics of
programming.

Jurtle was designed for older middle school and high school students, but has
been used by many adults that want a gentle introduction to programming.

<http://www.otherwise.com/Jurtle.html>

 

[Guest]

And, do we already have IDEs

for educational purposes?

Eclipse 3.1 is a very helpful IDE. It has [list of features deleted]

It is also huge, confusing, full of "advanced" features, and is completely
lacking in features that would help anyone to learn (with the arguable
exception of auto-completion). IMO it is not even /slightly/ suitable for
beginners[*].

For the OP, BlueJ /is/ designed for beginners. More specifically, it is
designed for use by people who are learning to program, and learning how
to
think OO. I've never taught, with or without BlueJ, so I can't recommend
it
from personal experience, but the approach they take looks extremely
promising
to me.

-- chris

([*] I'm not so sure that it's particularly suitable for anyone else
either. I
use it myself -- as the least bad option available within my budget -- but
I
don't like it much)

I've been teaching with BlueJ. I and the students
like it very much. It's free. Take a look:

http://www.bluej.org/

 

[Guest]

BlueJ was written explicitly for teaching java language and OO thinking.
It does what's needed but is simple enough that it doesn't "get in the
way".

Have a look at their web site www.bluej.org.

Steve

What Steve said.

George

 

[Ross Bamford]

I'm inclined to agree, but it does depend on a number of factors. For
instance, the Java class library is pretty huge, and it just isn't possible to
learn enough of it for any of it to make sense in isolation, until /after/
you've done some programming -- but how to do that programming if you know
nothing about the class library ? Autocomplete /may/ (IMO) help to get over
that stage by, in effect, providing training wheels for the wobbling
programmer-to-be.

Well, definitely, but I've met too many programmers who automatically
type their identifier, wait for the method list, scroll to the method,
insert, wait for the variables, etc.

Perhaps an IDE that supports auto-complete, but only gives the user a
limited number of uses, a "three completes and you're out" rule

Where the <insert editor of choice here> + JDK approach fails (or rather, where
it risks failure) is that it doesn't teach /objects/. If all you are doing is
writing code, then it's unlikely that you'll ever think about anything except
code. The BlueJ IDE is uniquely (in the Java world) aimed at teaching OO by
providing "real" access to live objects. That (IMO) makes a difference in
kind.

This intrigues me, I'm off to have a look

Cheers,
Ross

 

[Thomas G. Marshall]

Chris Uppal coughed up:

I'm inclined to agree, but it does depend on a number of factors. For
instance, the Java class library is pretty huge, and it just isn't
possible to learn enough of it for any of it to make sense in
isolation, until /after/ you've done some programming -- but how to
do that programming if you know nothing about the class library ?
Autocomplete /may/ (IMO) help to get over that stage by, in effect,
providing training wheels for the wobbling programmer-to-be.

Possibly. The biggest problem with the class library is not its size per se
IMO, but the fact that the old ways and new ways of doing things are sitting
side by side and intertwined to a horrible degree. Furthermore, sometimes
the "old ways" have not reached the point of deprecation, so the user has
very little chance of knowing which way to go. I don't see any kind of
autocompletion solving that problem.

 

[Thomas G. Marshall]

Chris Uppal coughed up:

And, do we already have IDEs

for educational purposes?

Eclipse 3.1 is a very helpful IDE. It has [list of features deleted]

It is also huge, confusing, full of "advanced" features, and is
completely lacking in features that would help anyone to learn (with
the arguable exception of auto-completion). IMO it is not even
/slightly/ suitable for beginners[*].

RIght---not even slightly so. You left out the fact that it is a quickly
moving target to boot, but that by itself is not a sin.

Actually, I've been mystified by eclipse since its very beginning. So
popular has this thing been that I've had to force myself to use it to see
if there really is something that I was missing. I've hated it from the
beginning till now, and every stinking day in between, but am so afraid that
I must be missing something that I still use /only/ either it or a non-IDE
vi-javac-java-repeat cycle. I have to say that in all this time, and I've
used many different IDE's over the years, that eclipse is the least friendly
and least intuitive of the lot.

What I've discovered though is that when I raise such complaints, even with
complete examples as to why I find it hard to understand (not just over
usenet---conversationally as well), I am often met with a large emotional
response.

Eclipse, has somehow won over the /hearts/ of the engineers using it.

For the OP, BlueJ /is/ designed for beginners. More specifically, it
is designed for use by people who are learning to program, and
learning how to think OO. I've never taught, with or without BlueJ,
so I can't recommend it from personal experience, but the approach
they take looks extremely promising to me.

-- chris

([*] I'm not so sure that it's particularly suitable for anyone else
either. I use it myself -- as the least bad option available within
my budget -- but I don't like it much)

 

[Thomas Kellerer]

Thomas G. Marshall wrote on 05.05.2005 17:21:

Actually, I've been mystified by eclipse since its very beginning. So
popular has this thing been that I've had to force myself to use it to see
if there really is something that I was missing. I've hated it from the
beginning till now, and every stinking day in between, but am so afraid that
I must be missing something that I still use /only/ either it or a non-IDE
vi-javac-java-repeat cycle. I have to say that in all this time, and I've
used many different IDE's over the years, that eclipse is the least friendly
and least intuitive of the lot.

What I've discovered though is that when I raise such complaints, even with
complete examples as to why I find it hard to understand (not just over
usenet---conversationally as well), I am often met with a large emotional
response.

I can understand that. My primary IDE is NetBeans and I'm giving Eclipse a
try every now and then. Each time I dump it after several attempts to use
it. I feel it's utterly complex and disturbing to use. It might be because
I'm used to NetBeans and I can't get the right way of using Eclipse

Thomas

 

[Daniel Dyer]

Actually, I've been mystified by eclipse since its very beginning. So
popular has this thing been that I've had to force myself to use it to
see
if there really is something that I was missing. I've hated it from the
beginning till now, and every stinking day in between, but am so afraid
that
I must be missing something that I still use /only/ either it or a
non-IDE
vi-javac-java-repeat cycle. I have to say that in all this time, and
I've
used many different IDE's over the years, that eclipse is the least
friendly
and least intuitive of the lot.

So I'm not the only one? I too have tried several times to get into
Eclipse without ever getting hooked. People tell me of its great features
but I've never seen them because I've usually uninstalled it within 15
minutes of firing it up because using it makes me angry.

NetBeans would be OK if it had a more intelligent editor, decent
code-generation (getters, setters, constructors, etc.), better refactoring
and wasn't so slow.

Compare these to IDEA, which is powerful, fast and very helpful without
getting in the way, and it's clear that sometimes you do get what you pay
for.

Dan.

 

[David Segall]

"Thomas G. Marshall"

[snip]

Actually, I've been mystified by eclipse since its very beginning. So
popular has this thing been that I've had to force myself to use it to see
if there really is something that I was missing. I've hated it from the
beginning till now, and every stinking day in between, but am so afraid that
I must be missing something that I still use /only/ either it or a non-IDE
vi-javac-java-repeat cycle. I have to say that in all this time, and I've
used many different IDE's over the years, that eclipse is the least friendly
and least intuitive of the lot.

What I've discovered though is that when I raise such complaints, even with
complete examples as to why I find it hard to understand (not just over
usenet---conversationally as well), I am often met with a large emotional
response.

Eclipse, has somehow won over the /hearts/ of the engineers using it.

I agree, but then I feel exactly the same way about vi.