From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,baaf5f793d03d420 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: fc89c,97188312486d4578 X-Google-Attributes: gidfc89c,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,6154de2e240de72a X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,97188312486d4578 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: rgilbert@unconfigured.xvnews.domain (Bob Gilbert) Subject: Re: What's the best language to start with? [was: Re: Should I learn C or Pascal?] Date: 1996/08/06 Message-ID: <4u7fol$26s@zeus.orl.mmc.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 172464769 references: organization: The unconfigured xvnews people reply-to: rgilbert@unconfigured.xvnews.domain newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.unix.programmer,comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-08-06T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , smosha@most.fw.hac.com (Stephen M O'Shaughnessy) writes: > > > >No, learn both, learn everything, don't be prejudiced against some types of > >learning. You don't know what you're missing. Understanding things from > >both the top down and the bottom up adds a richness to your ability to > >deal with abstract concepts in your head, and figure out some concrete (i.e. > >programatic) expression of an abstract solution. > > > I agree with you. > I said we must learn both. My point is that we can't learn both at the same > time. I believe it is best to start with the higher level to get a good feel > for what the problems are and how to solve then, then work our way down to more > basic levels of the *machine* to see if there might be better ways to solve > specific problems on specific machines. Why can't we learn both at the same time? When it came to learning computer science I think I tended to learn both at the same time. I took basic EE courses and learned about operating transistors in saturation, how to build flip-flop circuits, and how to implement logic using these circuits, and finally how to design a computer architecture using these circuits (including micro- code design). At the same time I was learning PL/I programming, how to write bubble sorts, learning about the merits of structured programming, top-down design methods, various data structures, data base design, discrete mathmatics, ect. This was overlapped and followed with learning assembly, state machine theory, Turing machines, general compiler (language) theory, and so forth. Somewhere in my second senior year it all started to come together and make sense, not necessarily with a sudden turning on of the light of understanding, but a gradual turning up of the dimmer switch. Everybody is different, some learn better one way than the other, but I am a definite believer in the "burn the candle at both ends" method. At least that way you cover both bases. -Bob