Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 11th Apr 2007 16:35 UTC, submitted by ShlomiFish
General Development "What makes programming languages are suitable or unsuitable as introductory languages? Which languages are better learnt first and at which order? And why what the masses think is the most suitable introductory programming language is not in fact that. This paper examines several approaches to which programming language is the best, and afterwards gives several useful relations for which languages should come first. Finally it gives a final verdict, defends it and then gives some other good food for thought."
Thread beginning with comment 229603
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I guess you can call me an 'old fogie.'
by Almafeta on Wed 11th Apr 2007 17:43 UTC
Member since:

I still think that BASIC -- with its emphasis on being for "Beginners" -- is the way to go.

(In my programming classes, I routinely get ragged upon by my fellow students for occasionally slipping up and referring to a modern concept with a BASIC 4.0 term, or for writing notes longhand instead of using a laptop. I have yet to point out to these "more advanced" students that I'm head of the class...)

Reply Score: 5

fretinator Member since:

My son took a programming class his junior year in high school (last year), and they started with QBasic. It was kind of neat to me, since I started with basic - gwbasic. It amazing what you can do even in a language like qbasic. I kind of miss the simplicity of those days.

Reply Parent Score: 5

Ford Prefect Member since:

I also started with QuickBasic.

My experience is, if I would have started with Pascal first, it would've been easier to me to learn it the right way.

I guess if you're good enough, Basic won't hurt, but if you're not born to program, Basic is not a good start, as it lends to bad taste and the "I don't know what really happens here" attitude (which many fellow students tend to have, even without basic).

Reply Parent Score: 2