Re: My First Computer

["Ross Simpson" <yeah_whatever>]

"Glen" <lpepicel@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message...

> >>1. It needs a built-in easy-to-use programming language.
> >>
> > - some version of LOGO (for very young pre-literate kids)
> > - some version of BASIC (for older kids)
> > - source for the BASIC and LOGO, written in a better language
> >   (like C?), so they can be studied, extended, and modified
> >
> > I think the next critical tool is:
> >
> > 2. A machine-language development environment
> > - editor
> > - assembler
> > - debugger
> >
> > This allows one to get at the machine-code level, both for learning and
> > because there are certain tasks where speed and memory requirements
> > force you to use it.
> >
> > I would imagine users would progress from BASIC to C to assembler as
> > their interests and abilities grew.
> >
> > A lot could be learned from modern software development tools used for
> > today's microcontrollers. Languages like FORTH also offer some very
> > interesting ideas, like incremental assembly and compilation.
> >
>
>
> I would have a totally different opinion on this.  I'd like to hear what
> you think about it.
>
> 2-
> (I agree) that it needs something like Logo with the turtle and simple
> commands like "right 90" "Foraward 50" that have graphical feedback for
> little kids.

Pilot is better & it only has a couple of commands. I learned Logo standing
on my head!

> I disagree completely that kids should be learning BASIC and then they
> should go into C!  The gap between the two is huge.  The worse thing is
> that your going to produce about 28 "hack and slash" guys per class of
> 30 and only about 2 that write good code.

Moving onto C from any other language seems daunting (I'd have BASIC near
the top & C down the bottom - even after Assembly!). Learning C after
learning Pascal is better.

> The number one problem is learning how to program is learning how to
> manage complexity.  Anyone can learn how to write a good 60 line program
> but few can write a good 60,000 line program.  BASIC doesn't have
> features that allow one to do this-- so that class isn't going to teach
> them anything but how to write a one pager.

Is it possible to write a good BASIC program, but everyone tends to use the
easy way out, by filling it with GOTOs. GOSUB is much better & easier to
follow.

> C does how the ability to do huge programs but the tools that it
> provides are non-obvious to the beginner.  C is a KISS (Keep it simple
> stupid) language  it provides minimum tools needed to write powerful
> programs.  For example C has no namespaces per se.  But these can and
> are simulated in C using idioms that use what C does have including the
> header files.  Is it going to be easier to teach about namespaces with a
> language with direct suport for them via a "namespace" keyword or are
> you going to have a leacture where the class looks at a hieracrcy of c
> header files and maybe two of them get it.


TRUE!

Ross.