In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Duncan Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sadly a lot of Java programmers mistake the limitations of their language > for rules of OO programming, and worse this has spread from Java into other > languages where these restrictions no longer need apply. You can generalize that to, "a lot of programmers assume that OO is defined by whatever happens to be the first OO language they learn". In fact, it generalizes even further to the Law of Primacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principles_of_learning#Primacy). I recognize this drivel from the crud the FAA publishes: > Primacy, the state of being first, often creates a strong, almost unshakable, > impression. Things learned first create a strong impression in the mind that > is difficult to erase. For the instructor, this means that what is taught > must be right the first time. For the student, it means that learning must be > right. ³Unteaching² wrong first impressions is harder than teaching them > right the first time. If, for example, a student learns a faulty technique, > the instructor will have a difficult task correcting bad habits and > ³reteaching² correct ones. but fundamentally, it's true. If the first programming language (or the first OOPL) a person learns is Java, it should come as no surprise when they think they way Java does things is the only way to do things. Having seen no other ways yet, what else *could* they think? I have no objection to teaching Java in a CS curriculum. Or even making it the first language you teach. What I do object to is making it the ONLY language you teach. My next door neighbor's kid just finished a MSCS program. The curriculum did a pretty good job of covering most of the important topics, but they did it all in Java. Web development in Java, graphics programming in Java, algorithms in Java, etc. He's well prepared to get a job as a Java programmer (and, in fact, he did), but I don't think he's really trained to be a computer scientist. A good CS program should include a survey of different programming languages. Today, I would certainly want to give students exposure to C++, at least one of {Python,Ruby}, and a random sampling of some less main-line languages like Erlang, Lisp, PHP, Groovy, Smalltalk, or PostScript. Exactly which ones is not so important as getting to see a wide variety of different approaches. Only after you've seen a bunch of different ways of doing something can you start to appreciate the choices different language designers made. BTW, there's an interesting article in the July 2008 Computer Magazine: "In Priase of Scripting: Real Programming Pragmatism". Ronald Loui argues (amongst other things) that Python would make a good first language to teach in a CS curriculum.
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
