Talk:List comprehensions: Difference between revisions
m
→What can we learn, in retrospect, from a defective Rosetta 'task' ?
Line 104:
:'''Problem''' – Reduced language coverage and reduced scope for insight converged here to offer no help at all to learners of some languages, and reduced insight for those whose languages were covered.
:'''Solution''' – Understandable distraction away from the underlying concepts (and core editorial values) by what was, at the time, a novel notation, could have been mitigated by a discipline of stepping through Rosetta's 3 core goals, using them both as a kind of check-list, and as a stimulus to raising the game, and reflecting a little harder both on what the underlying issues really were, what list comprehensions really were (useful syntactic sugar for deeper processes in the core syntax of particular languages) and on what it would take to reach the largest number of languages, and the deepest and most useful levels of contrast, comparison and
The Rosetta stone was useful precisely because the focus was on meaning and task, without distraction by notation.
| |||