Re: Teaching programming

Jennifer Reed (JR270701@aol.com)
Sat, 20 Jul 1996 00:19:06 EDT

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: George Scott: "Re: Macintoshes on TCP/IP communications network"
Previous message: Carol Kerrigan: "Re: New York Wired"
Maybe in reply to: Jeffrey Miller: "Teaching programming"
Next in thread: William C. Mead: "Re: Teaching programming"

On Thursday July 18, 1996 Tom Johnson wrote :
<< I'd seriously consider trying C++ as a first programming language.
<<Since it is an object-oriented language, it utilizes concepts which
<<are widely accepted for their power and usefulness. FORTRAN and
<<BASIC are not object oriented, and their use encourages 'procedure
<<oriented' vs. object-oriented programming. LOGO is easy to learn as
<<a first language, but it also suffers from a lack of object-orientation.

Just had to voice my C/C++ disgust. After taking 3 years of college
programming (Pascal - w/ data structures, ADA, LISP, SQL), I took a C course
with a little of C++. I couldn't past the syntax of C. I know C++ is more
object oriented and is the up and coming programming language of serious
programmers, but as a first programming language to learn or a HS AP Exam
language??? How horrible.

Just my thoughts
Jennifer Reed
JR270701@aol.com

Next message: George Scott: "Re: Macintoshes on TCP/IP communications network"
Previous message: Carol Kerrigan: "Re: New York Wired"
Maybe in reply to: Jeffrey Miller: "Teaching programming"
Next in thread: William C. Mead: "Re: Teaching programming"