First programming language debate
- bad_brain
- Site Owner
- Posts: 11636
- Joined: 06 Apr 2005, 16:00
- 18
- Location: In your eye floaters.
- Contact:
@leetnigga
well, applause then for "successfully defending" your position as bossy narcissist....
still waiting for your introduction btw, we are all very interested to see what long way you came to become such an experienced and skilled expert...or is it maybe all also only based on your deep faith that everything you say is right and your vita would be kinda counterproductive to your self-proclaimed status as "oracle of truth"?
well, applause then for "successfully defending" your position as bossy narcissist....
still waiting for your introduction btw, we are all very interested to see what long way you came to become such an experienced and skilled expert...or is it maybe all also only based on your deep faith that everything you say is right and your vita would be kinda counterproductive to your self-proclaimed status as "oracle of truth"?
Leetnigga:
Most pre-made interfaces for data structures in the languages that have them are very simple. push(), pop(), something along those lines.
A hash table, for example, is more complex behind the scenes than the way it works on the outside shows.
You can easily use it if you simply understand that a key will only always match a single element, but you don't have to understand the hashing algorithm or anything about why it's good, fast or so on.
This does effectively mean that I want a generation of smart people, even if they are fewer. You seem to want to mass produce average idiots who can program because it has turned into simple button pushing.
Either way, I have my opinion, you have yours. Neither is wrong, neither is right.
No, that isn't the problem. The problem is that this discussion is not based on facts at all - the matter at hand is completely subjective, but you continue to try to treat it as if we're discussing scientific facts. No one is right, no one is wrong, but most of us still have different opinions.I think the problem here is that I'm not getting any counterarguments to my counterarguments. Were they not good arguments? Tell me.
Yes, it is, to some point. But this is where my (oh-so elitist) opinion comes into play yet again - I do not think a programmer should be writing code for a system whose inner workings he doesn't understand. And please, do not bother to comment on this yet again - I get it and respect it, you think the opposite.I've still seen it first hand how a programmer that starts out with a language that puts a large barrier of abstraction between him and the system and what's really happening
At some point in time, someone wrote the code that does whatever the high level language or its associated libraries do - I would say that the programmer who is able to do so(E.g. write, say, code for a linked list) is in his right to use a linked list. Someone who can't isn't. And again, I get you don't agree, but please, I don't think I can take another batch of being called elitist by a random guy on a random forum on the internet. It just .. hurts.Low level programming is just different. Saying 'where you have to do something yourself' suggests that you think in high-level languages shit is on cruise-control. That only shows how ignorant and elitist you are. It's still programming. While it's true that a lot of things are done for programmers, the point is that these things are implementation details. They're not a core concept of programming. For beginners I think it is important to teach them about those concepts, as opposed to teaching them about the design peculiarities of the current computer architecture.
Yet again, this is how our opinions differ. Yes, I do believe that one can easily use a linked list without understanding why or how it works like it does. I also think that one shouldn't be using it unless he can confidently tell him self that he does understand the implementation.Oh the elitism, it hurts.
Your argument about linked lists is nonsensical. How do you even use one without knowing what it is? Understanding the implementation of things is nice, but you can get a pretty good understanding of them without it. Regardless, some people just want to use data structures. Do you really want to judge them by whether or not they know about their implementation? I'm willing to bet that you use a few data structures yourself that you don't completely understand the implementation of.
That you think programming languages can be too easy is just mind boggling. I'm not even going to bother arguing.
Most pre-made interfaces for data structures in the languages that have them are very simple. push(), pop(), something along those lines.
A hash table, for example, is more complex behind the scenes than the way it works on the outside shows.
You can easily use it if you simply understand that a key will only always match a single element, but you don't have to understand the hashing algorithm or anything about why it's good, fast or so on.
To me, the hacker mindset is about knowing as much as possible, and using this knowledge to, well, do a fuckload of some nifty shit.The point is that there's a difference between learning about the design peculiarities of the current computer architecture and understanding things in programming. If you think people should learn these implementation details in order to become "real programmers" I think that's elitist.
This does effectively mean that I want a generation of smart people, even if they are fewer. You seem to want to mass produce average idiots who can program because it has turned into simple button pushing.
Either way, I have my opinion, you have yours. Neither is wrong, neither is right.
58... can any one interpret this number ???
I'm not gonna wait for answers like last time, coz I'm gonna explain it my self...
58 is the number of replies that "Mr. leet" has done in this single thread.. can you imagine...
Now I'm gonna explain it my own way... As you know, I'm studying nursing, and part of our learning experience we study some thing called psychiatric nursing (taking care of people with psychological abnormalities).... yes you're right, you all got it right I see that some one here has really some serious issues... Narcissism / being self centered is a big issue...
But more than that, "Mr. leet" has even a more serious issue...
It is called O.C.D. or Obsessive Compulsive Disorder ( go google it out for those who don't know whats that ) but I bet that you all know from this thread what O.C.D. is
people listen up * moudy clears throat - stands up straigh in front of the crowd*
STOP WASTING YOUR TIME REPLYING TO PEOPLE WHO
WANT TO WASTE YOUR TIME !!!!!!!!
crowd gives moudy a round of applause !
no offence leet... but ur simply wasting every one's time, if not your OWN time by just replying to people... apply what your telling us in all your replies... maybe you'll reach some where
I'm not gonna wait for answers like last time, coz I'm gonna explain it my self...
58 is the number of replies that "Mr. leet" has done in this single thread.. can you imagine...
Now I'm gonna explain it my own way... As you know, I'm studying nursing, and part of our learning experience we study some thing called psychiatric nursing (taking care of people with psychological abnormalities).... yes you're right, you all got it right I see that some one here has really some serious issues... Narcissism / being self centered is a big issue...
But more than that, "Mr. leet" has even a more serious issue...
It is called O.C.D. or Obsessive Compulsive Disorder ( go google it out for those who don't know whats that ) but I bet that you all know from this thread what O.C.D. is
people listen up * moudy clears throat - stands up straigh in front of the crowd*
STOP WASTING YOUR TIME REPLYING TO PEOPLE WHO
WANT TO WASTE YOUR TIME !!!!!!!!
crowd gives moudy a round of applause !
no offence leet... but ur simply wasting every one's time, if not your OWN time by just replying to people... apply what your telling us in all your replies... maybe you'll reach some where
mahmoud_shihab@hotmail.com
Tough crowd.
An analogy:
What you're advocating is telling beginning writers to learn Latin. I'm not saying Latin is bad, or that it's a bad idea to learn Latin. On the contrary, I think learning Latin and the etymology of English words is great and I wholeheartedly recommend it... once you know how to write. I just think it's ridiculous to learn first.
Having an opinion, thinking I'm right and trying to argue it doesn't make me a narcissist. The whole point of this thread is to give advice to other people, trying to help them. That's not self-centered.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
I think you've wasted more with your armchair diagnosis and the idiotic way you wrote your post.
Let's focus on the subject at hand people. Stop wasting everybody's time with your personal attacks.
Here is what I used in my previous post to support my position:DNR wrote:When you support your arguments with "I" then you leave people to question who you are and why they should consider "I" as a good source of information.
- The fact that high level languages are an abstraction from the underlying machine is exactly the point of a high level language. (It's in the definition)
- The things that high level language do for the programmer are mostly implementation details. For example, memory for variables in most high level languages (the ones that I recommend) is allocated automatically. The fact that memory has to be allocated is an implementation detail of the operating system and underlying architecture. Doing this manually means that you deal with the design peculiarities of the current computer architecture. The argument here is that if you learn a high level language, you learn about the core concepts of programming; things that will also apply to different computers and programs written in languages other than C or C++.
The point of that sentence was the last part. I tell people why they are wrong in my opinion. I give arguments that I support with facts such as the ones listed above. I could be the most incredible guy, and the facts wouldn't change. I actually wrote a pretty good explanation of that a few posts up, perhaps you should read it. I'll write my introduction when I please. Who I am doesn't change the quality of my arguments.DNR wrote:thats the theme of your thread.I just really think that I'm right...I just disagree with pretty much everything that they say and I tell them why.Go write that introduction, it seems you are not afraid to write anything, except your real introduction.Credibility is the quality of being believable.
Well there was some discussion in this thread, but the people here seem to have an urge to attack me on a personal level.lilrofl wrote:Dave Mathews Band SUCKS!
I'm sure that some of you are offended by that statement, and you are what's wrong with the world.
Accepting a difference of opinion as a personal attack, instead of focusing on the larger more important issues of life... like why you enjoy shitty music.
I'm not saying that it's not possible to make progress when you start with C, or that you'll never be a good or successful programmer when you start with C, I just think there are better ways to start off. This thread is about that optimal choicelilrofl wrote:I tend to agree that higher level programming is better to start with... but that's probably because I started with Python rather then C. I remember in High School the only programming option was C, and (not to defend the choices of formalized education) but I'm sure that the people who learned C in that manner still made progress in the world of programming as well... maybe they're not world class programmers now, but neither am I.
I agree. I think the implementation details that you have to deal with in low level languages will only be a distraction.lilrofl wrote:I think that it can definitely go both ways, I just prefer the high-level option, it's easier to grasp, in my opinion, and when you're self teaching anything it's important to keep it simple and productive to maintain interest and drive through accomplishment.
Compilers are not bound to high or low level languages. If you go low-level enough, you won't need a compiler anymore (writing raw binary). And there are many high level languages that are compiled, for example Haskell and OCaml.lilrofl wrote:I'm not saying that accomplishment can't be had through a low-level start... but you definitely get to skip the compiling step... which if you're counting is actually like 5 steps or so.
Thank you very much.lilrofl wrote:I agree with the concept and idea, if not the person who spoke it.
I was referring to the one about high level languages being best for beginners, but thanks anyway.bad_brain wrote:@leetnigga
well, applause then for "successfully defending" your position as bossy narcissist....
Again, I don't need people to believe in me in order for them to be convinced by my arguments. I just look at the facts, form my opinion and support my opinion using the facts.bad_brain wrote:still waiting for your introduction btw, we are all very interested to see what long way you came to become such an experienced and skilled expert...or is it maybe all also only based on your deep faith that everything you say is right and your vita would be kinda counterproductive to your self-proclaimed status as "oracle of truth"?
What the best programming language to begin with is is subjective, but there are loads of facts about programming languages. I think I pretty clearly separate my opinion from the facts. We can still argue our opinions using the facts.IceDane wrote:No, that isn't the problem. The problem is that this discussion is not based on facts at all - the matter at hand is completely subjective, but you continue to try to treat it as if we're discussing scientific facts.
Yes, and the point of this thread was to try and convince each other of our position on the subject.IceDane wrote:No one is right, no one is wrong, but most of us still have different opinions.
I agree, of course. And I think it's very worthwhile to learn C. I just don't think it should be learned as a first language.IceDane wrote:To me, the hacker mindset is about knowing as much as possible, and using this knowledge to, well, do a fuckload of some nifty shit.
An analogy:
What you're advocating is telling beginning writers to learn Latin. I'm not saying Latin is bad, or that it's a bad idea to learn Latin. On the contrary, I think learning Latin and the etymology of English words is great and I wholeheartedly recommend it... once you know how to write. I just think it's ridiculous to learn first.
This is not what I want at all. Calling high level programming "button pushing" is completely ridiculous. It's still programming. The (most important) difference is that you get to focus on the subject at hand, not the peculiarities of the current computer architecture.IceDane wrote:This does effectively mean that I want a generation of smart people, even if they are fewer. You seem to want to mass produce average idiots who can program because it has turned into simple button pushing.
Armchair psychology, cute.moudy wrote:Now I'm gonna explain it my own way... As you know, I'm studying nursing, and part of our learning experience we study some thing called psychiatric nursing (taking care of people with psychological abnormalities).... yes you're right, you all got it right I see that some one here has really some serious issues... Narcissism / being self centered is a big issue...
Having an opinion, thinking I'm right and trying to argue it doesn't make me a narcissist. The whole point of this thread is to give advice to other people, trying to help them. That's not self-centered.
Why don't you Google itmoudy wrote:But more than that, "Mr. leet" has even a more serious issue...
It is called O.C.D. or Obsessive Compulsive Disorder ( go google it out for those who don't know whats that ) but I bet that you all know from this thread what O.C.D. is
You have no idea what you're talking about.
I want to waste time, really? I don't. What makes you think that?moudy wrote:people listen up * moudy clears throat - stands up straigh in front of the crowd*
STOP WASTING YOUR TIME REPLYING TO PEOPLE WHO
WANT TO WASTE YOUR TIME !!!!!!!!
crowd gives moudy a round of applause !
no offence leet... but ur simply wasting every one's time, if not your OWN time by just replying to people... apply what your telling us in all your replies... maybe you'll reach some where
I think you've wasted more with your armchair diagnosis and the idiotic way you wrote your post.
Let's focus on the subject at hand people. Stop wasting everybody's time with your personal attacks.
- floodhound2
- ∑lectronic counselor
- Posts: 2117
- Joined: 03 Sep 2006, 16:00
- 17
- Location: 127.0.0.1
- Contact:
As a first programming language go with whatever you go with. The simple truth is that all programming languages do the same thing! They translate human instructions to machine instructions. I started with a type of basic back when the commodore vic20 was introduced in the 1980.
This language did not make it any more difficult or less difficult when I went on to learn others languages. Just the desire to learn a programming language is great and should not stop at one language so, lean as many as is needed.
This language did not make it any more difficult or less difficult when I went on to learn others languages. Just the desire to learn a programming language is great and should not stop at one language so, lean as many as is needed.
- Pong18
- Cyber Mushroom
- Posts: 357
- Joined: 20 May 2009, 16:00
- 14
- Location: Manila, Philippines
- Contact:
in my opinion learning DOS first will the perfect choice, learning how to create simple batch files that copy files, do ip configurations, delete stuff, backup registry, etc. dos is simple and without DOS we wont have linux,mac,windows,netware,citrix, all OS... imagine life without dos, dang we may even have no suck-o today without it... so i think learning DOS first will be the first step 1 has to take to take the path of programming...
then try python, then java,then basic, then c# whichever you feel comfy with.
it is important that you feel comfy with the language you are trying to learn and you enjoy it. if you are not comfy there is 98% probability that you will quit... after being an adept at these firsts then proceed to learning Assembly, C, C++, and other harder language...
this is my opinion according to my experience...
my personal faves are DOS and JAVA
then try python, then java,then basic, then c# whichever you feel comfy with.
it is important that you feel comfy with the language you are trying to learn and you enjoy it. if you are not comfy there is 98% probability that you will quit... after being an adept at these firsts then proceed to learning Assembly, C, C++, and other harder language...
this is my opinion according to my experience...
my personal faves are DOS and JAVA
ad-hominem?
You have no credibility. Go write this important paper, and post it somewhere else.
DNR
Thats your quote, thats you said that was not "just facts", it was your personal statement - and thus we were allowed to interject our personal statements in this thread.Actually I would accuse you of posting nonsense. The claim that it is mandatory to learn a low level language, and that beginners should even start with one is laughable. If I wouldn't have intervened, people would have actually bought your elitist bullshit.
You have no credibility. Go write this important paper, and post it somewhere else.
DNR
-
He gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to the discerning. He reveals deep and hidden things; he knows what lies in Darkness, and Light dwells with him.
He gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to the discerning. He reveals deep and hidden things; he knows what lies in Darkness, and Light dwells with him.
I never said it was "just facts". I post my personal opinion and support it with arguments making use of facts. I've lost count how many times I've said this and you didn't listen.DNR wrote:ad-hominem?
Thats your quote, thats you said that was not "just facts", it was your personal statement - and thus we were allowed to interject our personal statements in this thread.Actually I would accuse you of posting nonsense. The claim that it is mandatory to learn a low level language, and that beginners should even start with one is laughable. If I wouldn't have intervened, people would have actually bought your elitist bullshit.
Also, that post you quoted was not an ad-hominem attack if that's what you were suggesting.
There's just no talking to you, is there?DNR wrote:You have no credibility.
Ad-hominem: A fallacious objection to an argument or factual claim by appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim; an attempt to argue against an opponent's idea by discrediting the opponent himself.
This is what you're doing by questioning my credibility. It's weak.
I'd appreciate it if we could stay on the topic. Thanks in advance.