I remember 101 in Pascal, switched at semester break to Modula-2 ; both sweet languages .
However my first "programming" course was "Recipe Development" in my Culinary Arts days. --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I think there is a mistaken assumption in the question that was first > > asked, and that many seem to have taken at face value: that Java is an > > appropriate language for learning programming. I don't think this is true. > > hi all! > I will not contribute anything to the "tim-thread", 'nuff said ;o) > as I am giving courses for developers ranging from fundamental programming > logic, > C, OO basics, OOA/OOD, C++ and JAVA I want to express my opinion on > the above statement (with which I choose to disagree ;o) > I myself started with BASIC on a C64 at the age of 12 I think (some while > ago ;) > and accumulated I think 18 languages so far (most of them not used actively > any more of course). > I do not think that BASIC (be it QBASIC, VB or whatever) is a very good > place to start. > all developers I meet/met that come either from procedural languages (host > development with > COBOL, PL/1, Fortran or the like) or from VB (not *really* OO ;o) do have > extreme difficulties to get rid of a bunch of nasty habits that are a direct > consequence of the languages they worked in (for quite a while mostly) > PASCAL is a good start for getting a grasp on the concepts of structured > programming, but the syntax > is quite far off if you want to go into the C++/JAVA direction. (BTW, > talking of learning languages... > does anyone remember MODULA 2? quite a good thing, the successor of PASCAL, > also > conceived by nicolaus wirth, inventor of PASCAL. later he did OBERON which > never got a catch > in the industry despite of having some great concepts) > some postings suggested C as a beginners language. I do not think that is > quite a good idea either, > too many catches for the rookie, think of explicit memory handling, side > effects, missing boolean type, > pointers etc etc... > if you want to show the basic procedural concepts, why not use the > procedural parts of JAVA? > it is perfectly possible to write simple demo programs without knowing > anything about the OO syntax/concepts (ok, you have to declare an enclosing class > and a main-method; count that and "System.out.println()" as a "cooking > recipe" and explain that later on ;o) > so, to make a long story short: PASCAL or MODULA 2 if you do not care about > C/C++/JAVA-like syntax. > else JAVA ;o) > cheers > > PS: > > > Java introduces two important and difficult topics at the same time: > > programming and object-oriented design. Because they're so intertwined in > > Java, it's hard to get a handle of one if you don't already have a handle > > on the other. > > well, yes, so do not introduce them at the same time ;o) OO-knowledge is not > necessary > to use JAVA for examples of simple iterators, selectors and all procedural > stuff. > > -- > Werden Sie mit uns zum "OnlineStar 2002"! Jetzt GMX w�hlen - > und tolle Preise absahnen! http://www.onlinestar.de > > > ____________________________________________________ > To change your JDJList options, please visit: > http://www.sys-con.com/java/list.cfm > > Save Bandwidth! Clean up your posts before replying > ____________________________________________________ ===== Mark Zawadzki Performance Engineer/DBA/Programmer extraordinaire� [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Democracies die behind closed doors," - Judge Damon Keith __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com ____________________________________________________ To change your JDJList options, please visit: http://www.sys-con.com/java/list.cfm Save Bandwidth! Clean up your posts before replying ____________________________________________________
