"I have the impression you are approaching Etoys from the wrong angle. It's not about "scripting" or even "programming" in the popular sense. It's about working with objects. Imagine what you would do if you were that object - how would you know it's your time to do something? Trying to implement a centrally controlled event-trigger system in etoys is certainly possible (there is no formal proof but it's obviously Turing-complete) but you are working against the system than within. That object-centric perspective was perhaps best understandable with Papert's *mechanical* turtles that you controlled. These original turtles were not just images on the screen with an x and y position. Or worse, colors in a 2D grid, or even numbers in an array called frame buffer. They were actual objects that you could touch and instruct. In Etoys it's the same - you create an object and describe its behavior. When you reference other objects in a script, it's generally good practice to just observe what they do, rather than make them do something. We recently added the option to hide the receiver tile in each line of a script to make the distinction between "me" and "other" objects more obvious. Otherwise it's too tempting to have one large central script that controls the behavior of all objects (which is what people previously exposed to "programming" often try to do). So try to rethink your problem if all you had at your disposal where independent agents that behave on their own. You may be surprised at what the result will look like :) by Bert"

Well, what could I say. Agreed and disagreed. But before that I should pictures myself as a kid. What should the word 'programming' means to me and what word is the most appropriate to be replaced with the activities that similar with programming.