Re: Testing job applicants

[brucehoult@pobox.com (Bruce Hoult)]

In article <ut0pq7.rj9.ln@fenelon.com>, Pete Fenelon <pete@fenelon.com> wrote:

> >   It's easier and faster to teach a good programmer a new language than to
> > teach someone who knows a language to be a good programmer.
> 
> Agreed 200%. There's far too much emphasis in introductory courses on 
> language syntax and specifics. Ideally, whoever teaches CS101 or
> its equivalent should just teach algorithms and data structures

Absolutely.

It's astounding to me that preople are today teaching raw beginners C++. 
And they're flounderng.  C++ is the best and most practical language with
the widest distribution and use (at least until/unless Dylan takes off),
and I've been using it since 1989, but it's a stupid language to teach
beginners.  There's just far too *much* of it, and it's far too
unforgiving.  Java would be better (in the absense of being able to buy
textbooks on Pascal any more) but a small simple language such as Scheme,
SmallTalk, or Logo would be much better.  Something with a simple and
regular syntax that you can learn in a few minutes but that still has
sufficient power to do everything you want to cover in a programming
course.

-- Bruce