Re: [Nolug] Teaching languages

On Sun, 2003-07-13 at 10:22, Dustin Puryear wrote:
> At 02:45 AM 7/13/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> >On Sun, 2003-07-13 at 01:27, Brad N Bendily wrote:
> > > In my opinion, although I haven't really used
> > > any language extensively, I would think either
> > > C or C++. Mostly because those languages seem to
> > > be a foundation for current languages.
> >
> >I'd say "Python on 'Unix'", but "Python on Windows" is almost
> >as good. It has a clear syntax, is either procedural or object
> >oriented, depending on your own desires, and yet the simplicity
> >does not limit you, like Pascal does.
>
> I heard somewhere that Georgia Tech. actually uses Scheme as their beginner
> language. The idea is that Scheme doesn't require you to understand
> concepts that may confuse beginners (i.e., pointers and their proper use),
> so students just get to work. As someone that began life using a procedural
> language like C and also assembly I have to wonder if I wouldn't be a
> better programmer having learned a higher-level language like Scheme or
> Python early on. It is one thing to adapt and learn to a new language or
> programming paradigm, but in my case I find that I still think the way I
> was originally trained.

Yes, you always (or at least for a *long* time) cleave to your
1st intense language and it's style.

You're also right that every new programmer must eventually be
exposed to the metal, to be taught that "a man's got to know
his hardware's limitations".

-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Ron Johnson, Jr.     Home: ron.l.johnson@cox.net          |
| Jefferson, LA  USA   http://members.cox.net/ron.l.johnson |
|                                                           |
| 4 degrees from Vladimir Putin
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
___________________
Nolug mailing list
nolug@nolug.org