The views mentioned here are not just ours. Jeliot has raised a great deal of interest everywhere it has been demonstrated. There clearly has been a need for a product like Jeliot.
Animation is often helpful when trying to debug a code. Certain logical errors are often clearly seen in an animation while going through source code only can be difficult as well as tedious.
Animations do normally have a downside: they are difficult to construct and once ready, they are difficult to change. Jeliot changes this totally. The construction of an animation once an algorithm is written is totally automated. All the user has to do is to select the data structures to be included in the animation. These selections can be made to a number of stages and changed even when the animation is running.
If you are learning to program, use Jeliot. Seeing what happens inside your code makes all the difference - or you can choose one of the examplary algorithms provided by Jeliot and see what happens when you do something differently.
If you are a teacher trying to teach bunch of students for example why quicksort is better than bubblesort, use Jeliot - or give out the source codes and ask the students to experiment with the algorithms and Jeliot. Jeliot provides an easy way to see the effect after changing the input data, or the code. Have you ever tried to figure out what exactly a piece of code written by a student in an exam actually does? Why not use Jeliot to find out?
If you are a researcher working on a new algorithm, use Jeliot. When trying to get an algorithm to actually work the way it should Jeliot provides a nice visual debugger which animates the critical sections of your code.
If you like animations, use Jeliot. They may not have the smoothness and beauty of a
Disney cartoon, but they are easy to make and to play with.