programming languages

Completed Learn TypeScript Course on Codecademy

- lmn

Back in December, I completed the C# course on Codecademy. This was mainly in order to be able to broaden the scope of my contribution to the project I was involved with at Unity and take a step outside the Python bubble I had for so long limited myself to. This was shortly before I went on paternity leave. On returning from my leave, however, I found that a lot had changed. Most relevant to this post, the team had decided to move away from the Unity-oriented C# implementation of the product to one in TypeScript.

I, for one, had never programmed before in TypeScript but this was not going to deter me from giving it a shot. Having had a positive experience in learning C# on Codecademy, I was pleased to see that they had a course on TypeScript as well and signed up for it immediately. What was different this time was that I wasn’t learning TypeScript solely from the course. I already had a team implementing a product with this language, and this served as a very valuable means to get hands-on experience with it while I got myself familiar with the fundamentals and features of the language through the course. I noticed quite a few similarities to Python (focus on scripting, pyenv versus nvm for managing language versions and packages, similarity between npm / npx commands and the python command), and this helped me hit the ground running. What unexpectedly helped me a lot was my use of mypy in making my Python code type-safe over the past year or so thanks to my colleague Matti’s insistence. I felt totally at home in adding and manipulating the types of variables in TypeScript, which is something that would’ve taken me a while to get used to otherwise. Anyway, now I’m actively contributing to our new codebase thanks to the kind feedback and review of my colleagues and it feels good to be getting better at a new way of expressing myself in code :-).

Over the past three years, I have (and might I add, serendipitously) ended up programming in Standard ML, Racket (both as part of an excellent series of courses on functional programming offered on Coursera), C# and now TypeScript. It’s hard to measure how better a programmer this has made me, but it has certainly broadened my perspective to what one can do across programming languages and how it’s only a matter of getting used to some basic (often superficial) differences in how one reads and writes code before being able to apply what one has learnt or used in a previous language. The theoretical concepts, of course, are very similar. It’s just that some languages make it easier to do certain things than others. And this was one of the things that was emphasised in the Coursera courses on Programming Languages. Over the past year I have worked with some excellent programmers at Unity, some of whom have been academically involved with Programming Languages, and I bet any wisdom I have to offer in this little post would only scratch the surface of what they might have to say on the subject. Anyway, I really look forward to see where things go from here for me!

Oh, and of course, I did get a shiny new certificate of completion from Codecademy!

Completed Programming Languages (Part B) on Coursera

- lmn

Earlier at the start of this month, I began the second Programming Languages course (Part B), offered by Prof. Dan Grossman of the University of Washington. I had done the first course a few months ago and found it very beneficial when it came to my understanding of some functional programming concepts and idioms, the notion of elegance in programming and good programming practices in general. It also really helped me formalise much of what I had come across in relation to Functional Programming, and approach the adoption of this style of programming more systematically in my own day-to-day programming projects. After nearly two months of having done that very interesting and challenging course, and having felt that a good bit of it had sunk in I decided to take on this second one.

The goals of this course were three-fold:

  1. To allow one to apply some of what was taught in the first course in the context of Standard ML (SML) to a new programming language, namely Racket.
  2. To introduce features of Dynamically Typed programming languages through Racket, and compare these in contrast with those of Statically Typed programming languages, such as SML.
  3. To understand the inner workings of a language interpreter by implementing one for a very simple hypothetical programming language in Racket.

I won’t be going into much details about the learnings of this course yet. I plan to do so in a couple of months when I’ll be done with the third and final course in this module and I will have had the chance to re-visit the contents of the first two courses to gain a better overall perspective.

In the meantime, here’s the certificate I was awarded for completing it.

Completed Programming Languages (Part A) on Coursera

- lmn

Having been curious about Functional Programming for a while now, and tried incorporating features of the paradigm into my own work with Python, I decided to give the first (Part A) of the three-part Programming Languages course module on Coursera. The module is meant to systematically introduce one to various theoretical concepts of programming languages, while having a special focus on Functional Programming. This first course (Part A), which I recently completed with a score of 98%, illustrated said concepts with the help of Standard ML – a Functional-style language.

It was excellently designed course, and also quite challenging. Apart from spending time on introducing the very basics of SML early on, it covered some very interesting concepts such as Pattern Matching, Function Closures, Partials, Currying and Mutual Recurstion. The programming assignments really made sure you understood what was covered in the course material, and the course-handouts were thorough and clear. There was also a strong focus on the matter of programming style, with the instructor commenting on what he considered good/poor programming style while covering the various concepts. We were marked on the style of our submissions too.