Re: Fun with C

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Fri, 22 Apr 2011 19:08:33 -0700 (PDT), Elias Salom�o Helou Neto wrote:

> On Apr 22, 6:21�am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:
> 
>> Nevertheless, future professional programmers should never be exposed to C
>> as the first language. It is like teaching physics in the school. Pupils
>> first learn the physics of XIX century. When they made 3/4, they are told:
>> guys, that was wrong! Here is how it goes! Programmers must learn concepts
>> and techniques which C cannot illustrate. What C can illustrate is how not
>> to program.
> 
> When it comes to physics, the main reason to teach classical
> mechanical is that it is actually a good approximation to modern
> theories and the math is far more simple. Nobody will say "guys, that
> was wrong!" because that is not wrong, it just must be used within its
> valid limits.

I heard that wrong argument so many times.

> Rockets reached the moon based on computations that used
> classical Newtonian mechanics.

So? Linux was written in C, does it justify C?

[I hope your students do not build rockets (:-))]

> It is quite different with programming languages, as C is actually
> harder than Pascal, which is a great tool for teaching programming.

In which sense is C harder? I bet students find it simple. It is hard to
teach concepts of software design on example of C? But Newtonian mechanics
is perfect for teaching cosmology, quantum effects, optics, fields etc?

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de