Programming language for children
jaydanie at gmail.com
Fri Jun 19 01:15:44 UTC 2009
> Knapp said:
>>> That's not to say it's the only way; that C is much more intimidating
>>> that Java/PHP is a very valid point. This is my personal opinion as to
>>> which route is easier in the long run. Just because it differs from
>>> yours doesn't make it "appalling".
>> Having read your argument about learning C first makes me want to say
>> that people should just learn Assembly first. This is not sarcasm. My
>> second language was 6502 assembly and that understanding greatly helped
>> me to understand C.
> For educational purposes, I agree. Particularly 6500 assembly, because it
> is one of the less hieroglyphic assemblers.
>> All this comes down to a top
>> down or bottom up approach to learning. What is best seems to be
>> dictated by personality type or learning type.
> I don't agree. Even if you learn an OO language, a solid understanding of
> OO principles is essential, regardless of the language, to use it
>> People have often said
>> that learning basic first is bad but I don't think it ever hurt me.
> As a maths dude, first principles are everything, and thus essential. But
> folk don't need to know those principles nor the derivations to use the
> results. Nor should they. It's quite valid for me to derive a theorem
> based on any number of others without understanding the derivation of any
> of them.
>> is REALLY important is to document your programming as you do it and in
>> a way that it makes scene years latter! That is the one lesson my
>> computer teachers gave me that made any difference to me.
> There are definitely two schools (at least) of thought on this, as
> always. I sit in the camp of code being self documenting. This is a
> skill, so has to be learned. But it is enabled by modern tools, which
> allow arbitrarily long names because of code completion, and the
> decomposition of code into classes and small, discrete methods.
> Comments are essential, though, when something is not immediately clear
> from the code - complex algorithms are a likely candidate - or code has
> been frigged for performance.
> Things are also made clearer by tests, which again modern tools make
> ridiculously simple to implement.
But yet more difficult to change after designed. For instance, it's
fairly simple to design a crud application in Netbeans, but change
without breaking it (for a newbie at least) could prove more difficult
than if you had started with vi and C++ from the beginning!
More information about the ubuntu-users