[plt-scheme] The Schematics of Computation?

From: Matthias Felleisen (matthias at ccs.neu.edu)
Date: Wed Apr 9 11:25:22 EDT 2008

1. I was quite familiar with Schematics when I started designing  
HtDP. It's still on my bookshelf. I uses a breadth-first approach,  
which was popular back then. I do not at all consider it a 'relative'  
of SICP, except for the *silly* claim on syntax that they share.

In case it is not clear what I mean with silly claim: Most Scheme  
text books claim that Scheme's syntax is simple and that one can  
therefore cover more/deeper/better stuff in a freshman course. Nobody  
who makes such claims seems to have understood that the syntax isn't  
simple enough and that you need a smooth growth path for students  
from CS 1 to CS 2 if you want your knowledge to survive. And syntax  
is an obstacle.

2. Some people dislike everything PLT for reasons I fail to  
understand, and I am taking this blog post in just that vein.

3. If you care, read our design rationale for HtDP. It's available  
from my Papers web site. I am urging everyone who thinks he has good  
arguments against it to write them up. If they are rationale, I will  
publish them in JFP.

-- Matthias

Some people emotionally di

On Apr 9, 2008, at 11:07 AM, Grant Rettke wrote:
> Hi folks,
> Have any of you read Manis and Little's  _The Schematics of  
> Computation_?
> I heard it mentioned for the first time in this blog post:
> http://compsci.ca/blog/computer-science-at-waterloo-the-new-scheme- 
> of-things/#comment-103479
> Where does it fit compared to SICP and HTDP?
> Best wishes,
> Grant Rettke
> -- 
> http://www.wisdomandwonder.com/
> _________________________________________________
>   For list-related administrative tasks:
>   http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme

Posted on the users mailing list.