Differently from other regions in the Planet, since 2010, in Latin America textual programming language (Rhinoscripting) is
being replaced by its visual equivalent (Grasshopper). This is a consequence of our preference for an interactive platform, and
because our design problems are not as complex, so we aim to control geometrical problems or aspects belonging to an product
scale instead of an architectural one. Problems emerging when creating code could be improved by modifying and reusing
existing solutions as a starting point, since learning would not be centered in the object but in the process of creating it, using
a suitable instrument.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:PERUUPC/oai:repositorioacademico.upc.edu.pe:10757/604769 |
| Date | 11 1900 |
| Creators | Herrera Polo, Pablo C., Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC) |
| Contributors | pablo@espaciosdigitales.org |
| Publisher | SIGraDi 2012 |
| Source Sets | Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC) |
| Language | Spanish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceObject |
| Source | Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC), Repositorio Académico - UPC |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| Relation | http://cumincad.scix.net/data/works/att/sigradi2012_235.content.pdf, Referencias Andersen, P., Bennedsen, J., Brandorff, S., Caspersen, M., Mosegaard, J. 2003. Teaching programming to liberal arts students: a narrative media approach. ACM SIGCS, 35 (3), 109- 113. Burry, M. (2011). Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming. Sussex: John Wiley and Sons. Celani, G., Verzola, E. 2012. CAD Scripting And Visual Programming Languages For Implementing Computational Design Concepts: A Comparision From A Pedagogical Point of View. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 10 (1), 121-137. Converso, S. 2008. SHoP Works: Digital Constructive Collaborations. Roma: Edil Stampa. Davis, D., Burry, J., Burry, M. 2012. Understanding visual scripts: Improving collaboration through modular programming. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 9 (4), 361-375. Harrison, W. 2004. From the Editor: The Dangers of End-User Programming. Software IEEE, 21 (4), 5- 7. Herrera, P. 2011. Rhinoscripting y Grasshopper a través de sus instructores: un estudio de patrones y usos (pp. 180-183). Santa Fe: Universidad Nacional del Litoral. Kedan, E. 2012. Provisional: Emerging Modes of Architectural Practice USA. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Leitao, A., Santos L., Lopes, J. 2012. Programming Languages For Generative Design: A comparative Study. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 10 (1), 139-162. Loukissas, Y., Sass, L. 2004. Rulebuilding: 3D Printing: Operators, Constraints, Scripts. (pp. 176-185). Ontario: University of Waterloo. McCauley, R., Fitzgerald, S., Lewandowski, G., Murphy, L., Simon, B., Thomas, L., et al. 2008. Debugging: A review of the literature from an educational perspective. Computer Science Education, 18 (2), 93-116. Mitchell, W. 2010. Foreward. En R. Krawczyk (Ed.), The Codewriting Workbook: Creating Computational Architecture in Autolisp (pp. 7-8). New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Nardi, B. 1993. A small Matter of Programming. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Lyon, A. 2007. Foro IV: Epistolar. Revista de arquitectura. 15 (1), 8-13. Reas, C., McWilliams, Ch., Barendsen, J. 2010. Form+Code in Design, Art, and Architecture. New Jersey: Princeton Architectural Press Robins, A., Rountree, J., Rountree, N. (2003) Learning and Teaching Programming: A Review and Discussion. Computer Science Education, 13 (2), 137-172 |
Page generated in 0.0154 seconds