Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Contributing #41

Open
projetmbc opened this issue May 2, 2018 · 3 comments
Open

Contributing #41

projetmbc opened this issue May 2, 2018 · 3 comments

Comments

@projetmbc
Copy link

Hello.

I would like to try to contribute by proposing a symbolic mode for the algorithm (I do not like the Algobox like syntax that is really to verbose and not so pedagogical).

Where must I look at ?

@zdimension
Copy link
Member

zdimension commented May 2, 2018

Not really sure what you meant by "symbolic mode", could you elaborate on that?

For the syntax verbosity, it was made like that with the goal of being as similar as possible to Algobox's syntax (which is already not that good) so that teachers wouldn't have to learn new syntax.

Although adding a new syntax mode is entirely possible! Just write either here or on the wiki a documentation or something like that for the new syntax, and we'll see how we can add that to Turing. Thanks for your feedback.

Feel free to ask anything needed on this thread

Edit: I created a Gitter to make things easier: https://gitter.im/TuringDevelopment

@projetmbc
Copy link
Author

In France, the new bachelor exam will use x <-- 1 instead of x PREND LA VALEUR 1.

PS: Algobox syntax looks like doing math in the "Moyen Âge".

@zdimension
Copy link
Member

zdimension commented May 2, 2018

Oh I see what you meant. Basically, to display the instructions more like a real programming language instead of the current verbose syntax. Should be easy to implement. Would juste require a field in the settings and a branch in the statement stringification function. Also, (not a teacher but) I thought the new exams were supposed to use Python or something like that, did they change it again? Indeed, the new method is cleaner

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants