About programing, a general question

[K. Frank]

Hi Parshwa -

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 4:10 AM, Parshwa Murdia <ubuntu.bkn at gmail.com> wrote:
> hi,
> ...
> Possibly,
> C++ would not be that easy to start with (without knowing C!!) as it is
> merely the 'More C', what guys comment. Perhaps, taking the first priority
> as Linux, I hope I would not be having bad luck if I starting with C and
> simultaneously look into the basics of Linux too.
> ...
>> My personal opinion?  I would start with c++.  (I'm teaching my
>> daughter to program -- much to her dismay -- and I am teaching
>> her c++ -- also, much to her dismay.)
>
> I agree with your decision, but directly learning C++ would not be good but
> better is to go first through C, isn't it? As you say, C++ is just 'More C'.
> It is better for the Linux too, I guess.
> ...
> But I guess starting with C is the best, what you say? Directly should go
> for C++ or from C and then C++?

If you want to go the c++ route, I would advise you to start with c++.

To quote Marshall Cline, from his "C++ FAQ":

   [28.2] Should I learn C before I learn OO/C++?
   Don't bother.

See:

   http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/how-to-learn-cpp.html#faq-28.2

As Colin and Rob also emphasized, there are a number of
disadvantages to learning c as a bridge to c++, and there
is no real benefit.

Except in specialized circumstances (which don't match what
you say you want to do), I would not advise anyone these days
to learn c as a language in its own right; learn c++, instead.

C++ is the way to go.


By the way, BASIC is not the way to go:

   Real Programmers don't write in BASIC. Actually, no programmers
   write in BASIC... after age twelve.

(Oops, my daughter is still twelve...)

See, for example:

   http://www.multicians.org/thvv/realprogs.html


Best of luck, and Happy Hacking!


K. Frank