Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This paper compares the use of scripting languages and visual programming languages for teaching computational design concepts to novice and advanced architecture students. Both systems are described and discussed in terms of the representation methods they use. With novice students better results were obtained with the visual programming language. However, the generative strategies used were restricted to parametric variation and the use of randomness. Scripting, on the other hand, was used by advanced students to implement rule-based generative systems. It is possible to conclude that visual languages can be very useful for making architecture students understand general programming concepts, but scripting languages are fundamental for implementing generative design systems. The paper also discusses the importance of the ability to shift between different representation methods, from more concrete to more abstract, as part of the architectural education.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Celani et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: