Slashdot Mirror


Best Paradigm For a First Programming Course?

Keyper7 writes "The first programming course I had during my computer science schooling, aptly named 'Introduction to Programming,' was given in C because its emphasis was on imperative programming. A little before I graduated, though, it was decided that the focus would change to object-oriented programming with Java. (I must emphasize that the change was not made because of any hype about Java or to dumb down the course; back then and still, it's presented by good Java programmers who try to teach good practices and do not encourage excessive reliance on libraries.) But the practices taught are not paradigm-independent, and this sparked a discussion that continues to this day: which paradigm is most appropriate to introduce programming? Besides imperative and object-oriented, I know teachers who firmly believe that functional programming is the best choice. I'm interested in language-independent opinions that Slashdotters might have on this matter. Which paradigm is good to introduce programming while keeping a freshman's mind free enough for him/her to learn other paradigms afterwards?"

9 of 592 comments (clear)

  1. Assembler... seriously by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Give them a good understanding as to what is going on under the hood. It really helps them to connect the dots and really helps in the understanding of compiler/OS design, and basic concepts like "what's a stack?".

    Choose a simple 8-bit micro such as an AVR first, or an ARM. Something with a RISC architecture is nice and clean.

    Introduction to programming isn't what it used to be. Twenty or thirty years back that was often the first exposure a student had to programming. These days you'd be seriously concerned if a student showed up to a programming course and hadn't dabbled a bit at home.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  2. Linguistics by denissmith · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ways that meaning are encapsulated in different human languages can be a useful way to demonstrate the structural underpinnings of programming languages. Linguistics is more interesting than reading Boole and gives you a way to think about larger structures without tying you to a particular paradigm. All computer languages have strengths, all are inadequate. But so are human languages. There is a Korean word that expresses this exactly, but it doeasn't translate directly into English. :-)

    --
    I have nothing to hide. So, why are you spying on me?
  3. Re:Functional by El+Cabri · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There are no two things more opposite to each other than OOP and functional programming. Functional programming is about FUNCTIONS, which are those that return a value that is completely determined by their arguments, not depending on, or modifying, any state. OOP is all about calling METHODS, which have values that are determined by both the arguments and the state of the object they're called on, and often are meant to modify that state.

  4. Learn at least two paradigms WELL by _greg · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I recommend learning at least two languages representing significantly different paradigms during a programmer's formative period. In this instance I consider C, C++, Java, C# and the lot to be in the same paradigm - procedural.

    Haskell is a good language for exploring the functional paradigm. Smalltalk is good for object oriented. There are many good Prologs for learning logic relational programming. I recommend that a new programmer avoid multiparadigm languages until they have seriously explored programming in a more pure way in two or more paradigms.

    I used to recommend SICP, now I recommend CTM.

    Also important is to (1) enjoy the programming you are doing and (2) work on programs which do interesting things and get you feedback from others.

  5. Re:Functional by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And yet in an impure functional language a set of closures closing over the same variables are equivalent to an object with those functions implemented as methods.

  6. Math by spydabyte · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The basics of all computing, why we started building circuits, was mathematics. Algorithms was originally "dirty math" but now contains some of the most elegant mathematical proofs ever, due to the expansion of computing.

    An era ago computing majors were unheard of, they were applied mathematics majors.

  7. Re:All of them. by i.of.the.storm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That's similar to what my first college CS course has been like. We used SICP and it was a really interesting semester. We did functional, OO, client/server, and logic programming (or well those were the 4 paradigms that the prof considered the main ones) and it was pretty interesting. Since most people came in with OO experience only, doing functional programming through people for a loop at first. Of course, we did it all in Scheme, which is a cool language, too.

    --
    All your base are belong to Wii.
  8. Re:All of them. by mkbc · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Concepts of Programming Languages was a third year course at my University in which we discussed and formed a decent background in a variety of languages. I think you're skipping ahead. I got my kids learning with Scratch. When I was little there was Logos. But if we're talking CS programs, learning Pascal first has serverd me well - although I admit I have never encountered it outside of my University. All my first year courses that involved programming were done in Pascal. Its a procedural language that is easy to grasp - its for beginners and encourages good habits. Second year we did assignments in Pascal, Smalltalk and Prolog. It wasn't until my third year that I was expected to use C and C++. I think my University did it right in progressing to C and C++. C and C++ are for people who already know how to program so they are not good starting points.

  9. Re:The Basics. by smallfries · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It sounds like you've missed the point. Not all languages operate on statements, with variables and assignment. These are common to imperative languages, which all fall under a single paradigm. The submitter asked which paradigm would be best to introduce someone to programming.

    Your lack of experience in other paradigms (not meant as a slight, 99% of all mainstream work is done in imperative languages) means that you have a similar educational history to what the submitter is considering. You consider imperative languages to be the whole world, rather than just a subset of it.

    Logic, or functional languages are very different. Learning them forces you to consider other approaches to programming than those that are evident in an imperative language. Making someone learn a functional language first can teach them a lot about programming in general. Especially when they move over to an imperative language, but they have a different bag of tricks to apply to problems.

    One of the first languages that I learnt as a child was Logo. It's a bit of style these days, although it was fairly common back on 8-bit home computers. At the time I though of it as a bit weird in comparison to the other languages that I used, but it taught me to think about programming in a different way. It is only with the hindsight of 20 years and a degree that I can see that "weirdness" was because it was functional.

    --
    Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php