I personally find Go just a joy to program in and show my kids some code all the time (my kids are 9 years old)... it's still complex for them as i haven't overwhelmed them with programming. What they do absolutely LOVE though is code.org <http://s.bl-1.com/h/26Yp8n1?url=http://code.org/> ( https://studio.code.org <http://s.bl-1.com/h/26YpD93?url=https://studio.code.org/>/ ) - their school has a extra-curricular class around it, and all the kids have taken to it with a huge amount of enthusiasm.
The main thing i think they like is that it's visual - for an introduction (as a first language), i think the visual components really really help. At the moment, you can see the "JavaScript" behind the visual components you build, and the kids are starting to progress to that. What i believe might be really good is if we can help adapt code.org <http://s.bl-1.com/h/26YpJZ5?url=http://code.org/> to also show potential "Go" code (as an alternative to the javascript) and let people tweak the Go. The educational and fun structure has already been built by code.org <http://s.bl-1.com/h/26YpPy7?url=http://code.org/> and they have done such a marvellous job, why not build on that? On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Dan Kortschak < dan.kortsc...@adelaide.edu.au> wrote: > It's an interesting post and something I can see being true to an > extent, but I'd like to put forward an alternative from my own > experience. > > I came to Go as an extremely inexperienced programmer - a couple of > years with Perl and a childhood with C64 basic/6502/Z80 and virtually no > formal CS background (one half year unit in first year undergrad). > > When I started using Go it had only been open sourced for a year and a > half. I found the support for people starting to use Go to be > outstanding even when questions were only tangentially related to Go > (generic algorithmic problems were happily(?) helped with). In part it > seems this was due to decisions by the Go core developers to help foster > a helpful and welcoming environment (rsc has discussed the motivations > for this in the past). Maybe that "fresh scene" has diminished a little, > but it doesn't really seem so to me. > > Dan > > On Tue, 2016-07-19 at 08:16 -0700, Matt Aimonetti wrote: > > I just wanted to point out a post I published today talking about the > fact > > that we are often leaving new / less experienced Go developers high and > dry: > > https://medium.com/@mattetti/go-is-for-everyone-b4f84be04c43 > > > > I'd love to see what you all in mind to help new or junior developers. > > Maybe share some of the pain points you've experienced or seen (for > > instance setting up the Go path, finding resources to get started etc...) > > I'm thinking about a bunch of very short posts on basic topics and maybe > a > > real beginner tour of Go. We are going to do a beginner night next month > at > > our LA/Santa Monica Go meetup and hopefully better understand what the > > current pain points/blockers are. > > > > What do you think? > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "golang-nuts" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
