Agree totally with Gregg's recommendations. I am teaching my kids some Julia, they already had learned some Lua (from the ComputerCraft mod for MineCraft), and now they are also learning some JavaScript (not my favorite) because of free on-line lessons on Khan Academy. I'd like them to learn Scheme also, great little language! I used to write stuff in Rexx, on the Amiga, there used to be a whole ecosystem there built around using Rexx to bind programs together.
On Tuesday, August 4, 2015 at 2:10:06 PM UTC-4, Gregg Reynolds wrote: > > > On Aug 4, 2015 11:36 AM, "Sisyphuss" <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > > Or just start to read some Julia material, does it make sense to you? If > not, just give up. > > Brilliant! If at first you don't succeed, just give up! I wish my mom > had told me that decades ago. > > Julia as a first language might work if you have the right kind of mind. > Probably would not have worked for me but YMMV. > > On the other hand, why just one first language? If I had to do it all > over again I think I would pick 3 languages and attack them > simultaneously. Remember all programming languages amount to the same > thing in the end - unlike natural languages. So go ahead with Julia, but > also study Scheme (best book ever for autodidacts: The Little Schemer), and > one more. Avoid Java, shun C++, don't get me started on PHP. Python, > maybe. Javascript, nyet. Lua is very cool. Go is too. And - don't laugh > - any form of Rexx, probably NetRexx. Designed by a genius as a kind of > programming language with a human face. > > By working with multiple languages you will avoid having your tender gray > matter deformed by the biases of any particular language, easing your > transition to computational enlightenment. > > HTH, > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, August 4, 2015 at 5:34:40 PM UTC+2, phineas vang wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Just wondering if Julia is a good choice as a first programming > language to learn. I have limited experience in vba for MS Office apps and > SQL but these may not be considered true programming languages. > >> > >> Thanks >
