#racketslideshow — Public Fediverse posts

Freedom Learning Racket...
Easy text->slideshow conversion for quiz style workshops... I hope, gotta try it with people who agree to the experiment first.. But it should work... I can make it work...
https://codeberg.org/bsmall2/quiz-slide-racket
#RacketLang #RacketSlideshow #Slideshow #SlideshowQuizes
(Maybe I should learn MegaParsack for all the stuff I want to do with org-mode-inspired mark up. The markdown package replaced regexps's. Elsewhere I used a calmer convention for html's ruby-like Furigana effects)

Racket Slideshow

Have you considered slideshow?

https://docs.racket-lang.org/slideshow/index.html

Slideshow is a library for creating presentation slides. Unlike Powerpoint, Slideshow provides no WYSIWYG interface for constructing slides. Instead, like Beamer, a presentation is generated by a program.

To get started, run the slideshow executable, and click the Run Tutorial link.

Slideshow is included in the standard Racket distribution from https://racket-lang.org/ so you will already have it installed. 🤩

To learn more about Slideshow, see “Slideshow: Functional Presentations” :

Robert Bruce Findler and Matthew Flatt, “Slideshow: Functional Presentations,” Journal of Functional Programming, 16(4-5), pp. 583–619, 2006. http://www.cs.utah.edu/plt/publications/jfp05-ff.pdf

Slideshow is extensible! In addition to sharing amazing presentations users have also published extensions as Racket packages. See more on the Racket Wiki at https://github.com/racket/racket/wiki/Artifacts:-Slideshow

#slideshow chat or questions are welcome on Racket Discord https://discord.gg/PnwqWFCsyR or Discourse https://racket.discourse.group/

#Presentations #beamer #Racket #RacketLang #RacketLanguage #PowerPoint #RacketSlideshow

@Gopiandcode Have you considered doing your presentation slides in Racket Slideshow?

https://docs.racket-lang.org/slideshow/index.html

Slideshow is a library for creating presentation slides. Unlike Powerpoint, Slideshow provides no WYSIWYG interface for constructing slides. Instead, like Beamer, a presentation is generated by a program.

To get started, run the slideshow executable, and click the Run Tutorial link.

To learn more about Slideshow, see also “Slideshow: Functional Presentations” [Findler06].

Some resources are collected in the Racket Wiki at https://github.com/racket/racket/wiki/Artifacts:-Slideshow

@racketlang #Presentations #beamer #Racket #RacketLang #RacketLanguage #RacketSlideshow

.> Strand a computer scientist at an airport, and the poor soul would probably survive for days with only a network-connected computer and five applications: an e-mail client, a web browser, a general-purpose text editor, a typesetting system, and a slide-presentation application. More specifically, while most any mail client or browser would satisfy the stranded scientist, probably only Emacs or vi would do for editing, LATEX for typesetting, and Microsoft PowerPoint(TM) for preparing slides...

.> The typical business traveler would more likely insist on Microsoft Word TM for both text editing and typesetting. Computer scientists may prefer Emacs and LATEX because text editing has little to do with typesetting, and these different tasks are best handled by different, specialized applications. More importantly, though, tools such as Emacs, vi, and LATEX are programmable. Through the power of programming abstractions, a skilled user of these tools becomes even more efficient and effective...

.> Shockingly, many computer scientists give up the power of abstraction when faced with the task of preparing slides for a talk. PowerPoint is famously easy to learn and use, it produces results that are aesthetically pleasing to most audience members, and it enables users to produce generic slides in minutes. Like most GUI-/WYSIWYG-oriented applications, however, PowerPoint does not lend itself easily to extension and abstraction. PowerPoint provides certain pre-defined parameters—the background, the default font and color, etc.---but no ability to create new abstractions....

.> Strand a computer scientist at an airport, and the poor soul would probably survive for days with only a network-connected computer and five applications: an e-mail client, a web browser, a general-purpose text editor, a typesetting system, and a slide-presentation application. More specifically, while most any mail client or browser would satisfy the stranded scientist, probably only Emacs or vi would do for editing, LATEX for typesetting, and Microsoft PowerPoint(TM) for preparing slides...

.> The typical business traveler would more likely insist on Microsoft Word TM for both text editing and typesetting. Computer scientists may prefer Emacs and LATEX because text editing has little to do with typesetting, and these different tasks are best handled by different, specialized applications. More importantly, though, tools such as Emacs, vi, and LATEX are programmable. Through the power of programming abstractions, a skilled user of these tools becomes even more efficient and effective...

.> Shockingly, many computer scientists give up the power of abstraction when faced with the task of preparing slides for a talk. PowerPoint is famously easy to learn and use, it produces results that are aesthetically pleasing to most audience members, and it enables users to produce generic slides in minutes. Like most GUI-/WYSIWYG-oriented applications, however, PowerPoint does not lend itself easily to extension and abstraction. PowerPoint provides certain pre-defined parameters—the background, the default font and color, etc.---but no ability to create new abstractions....

.> Strand a computer scientist at an airport, and the poor soul would probably survive for days with only a network-connected computer and five applications: an e-mail client, a web browser, a general-purpose text editor, a typesetting system, and a slide-presentation application. More specifically, while most any mail client or browser would satisfy the stranded scientist, probably only Emacs or vi would do for editing, LATEX for typesetting, and Microsoft PowerPoint(TM) for preparing slides...

.> The typical business traveler would more likely insist on Microsoft Word TM for both text editing and typesetting. Computer scientists may prefer Emacs and LATEX because text editing has little to do with typesetting, and these different tasks are best handled by different, specialized applications. More importantly, though, tools such as Emacs, vi, and LATEX are programmable. Through the power of programming abstractions, a skilled user of these tools becomes even more efficient and effective...

.> Shockingly, many computer scientists give up the power of abstraction when faced with the task of preparing slides for a talk. PowerPoint is famously easy to learn and use, it produces results that are aesthetically pleasing to most audience members, and it enables users to produce generic slides in minutes. Like most GUI-/WYSIWYG-oriented applications, however, PowerPoint does not lend itself easily to extension and abstraction. PowerPoint provides certain pre-defined parameters—the background, the default font and color, etc.---but no ability to create new abstractions....

.> Strand a computer scientist at an airport, and the poor soul would probably survive for days with only a network-connected computer and five applications: an e-mail client, a web browser, a general-purpose text editor, a typesetting system, and a slide-presentation application. More specifically, while most any mail client or browser would satisfy the stranded scientist, probably only Emacs or vi would do for editing, LATEX for typesetting, and Microsoft PowerPoint(TM) for preparing slides...

.> The typical business traveler would more likely insist on Microsoft Word TM for both text editing and typesetting. Computer scientists may prefer Emacs and LATEX because text editing has little to do with typesetting, and these different tasks are best handled by different, specialized applications. More importantly, though, tools such as Emacs, vi, and LATEX are programmable. Through the power of programming abstractions, a skilled user of these tools becomes even more efficient and effective...

.> Shockingly, many computer scientists give up the power of abstraction when faced with the task of preparing slides for a talk. PowerPoint is famously easy to learn and use, it produces results that are aesthetically pleasing to most audience members, and it enables users to produce generic slides in minutes. Like most GUI-/WYSIWYG-oriented applications, however, PowerPoint does not lend itself easily to extension and abstraction. PowerPoint provides certain pre-defined parameters—the background, the default font and color, etc.---but no ability to create new abstractions....

.> Strand a computer scientist at an airport, and the poor soul would probably survive for days with only a network-connected computer and five applications: an e-mail client, a web browser, a general-purpose text editor, a typesetting system, and a slide-presentation application. More specifically, while most any mail client or browser would satisfy the stranded scientist, probably only Emacs or vi would do for editing, LATEX for typesetting, and Microsoft PowerPoint(TM) for preparing slides...

.> The typical business traveler would more likely insist on Microsoft Word TM for both text editing and typesetting. Computer scientists may prefer Emacs and LATEX because text editing has little to do with typesetting, and these different tasks are best handled by different, specialized applications. More importantly, though, tools such as Emacs, vi, and LATEX are programmable. Through the power of programming abstractions, a skilled user of these tools becomes even more efficient and effective...

.> Shockingly, many computer scientists give up the power of abstraction when faced with the task of preparing slides for a talk. PowerPoint is famously easy to learn and use, it produces results that are aesthetically pleasing to most audience members, and it enables users to produce generic slides in minutes. Like most GUI-/WYSIWYG-oriented applications, however, PowerPoint does not lend itself easily to extension and abstraction. PowerPoint provides certain pre-defined parameters—the background, the default font and color, etc.---but no ability to create new abstractions....

> 正式名称を超募集中... もう「もんたメソッド」で。…いいのか？ プレゼンの偉い人が使うときはそれなりの名前で呼んで下さい。^1

間抜け(内容がない？ 芯がない？と解釈していい？)の名前を変えましょう!
もともと「空欄を埋める」(Fill in the blanks)問題ですので

「空欄埋めメソッド」はどうですか。直接(みのもんたみたいな)間抜けを埋めなくてもいいと思いますけど、 Bullshitウンコな議論を無視して、 価値のあることに集中(注意を払うこと)できたらいいなぁぁ。

やっぱり RacketのSlideshowとslideshow/playですぐ#クイズ形式プレゼン できます。^2

^1 https://d.hatena.ne.jp/keyword/%E3%82%82%E3%82%93%E3%81%9F%E3%83%A1%E3%82%BD%E3%83%83%E3%83%89?kid=113456
^2 https://docs.racket-lang.org/slideshow/play.html#%28def._%28%28lib._slideshow%2Fplay..rkt%29._play-n%29%29

#プレゼン #プレゼン方法 #プレゼンメソッド #RacketSlideshow

高橋メソッド と もんたメソッド ^1 は #DrRacket と #Racket, #RacketSlideshow でするのが楽しいそうです。 友達が中学校を卒業した人達に挨拶するとき、 素朴なメッソッドでスライドを見せたいらしい。#Slideshow ^2 ですぐ#高橋メソッド できた、 簡単な #もんたメソッド もDRY理念を虫したら簡単にできそうけどplay-n ^3使った関数を作ったら繰り返しのない、ちょっと派手なスライドできそう。時間を作って、集中力の訓練としてやってみようかな。
ところで、#みのもんた は10何年前テレビで見たときに本能的にきらいだった。 最近「#ウンコな議論」を読みだしたら、その気持を説明できるようになりつつある。 ビジネスCMの影響が強すぎる社会になると、 ありそうな顔だけで、 見せかけのことで通せる感じ。 似ったような居眠り権力者、化石頭、があちこち決定権を握てしまっているじゃないかな？
^1 https://note.com/yumi_nomo/n/ndde9a3ee5cd0
^2 https://docs.racket-lang.org/slideshow/Creating_Slide_Presentations.html#%28part._.Slide_.Basics%29
^3 https://docs.racket-lang.org/slideshow/play.html#%28def._%28%28lib._slideshow%2Fplay..rkt%29._play-n%29%29