From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_40 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 10 Sep 93 16:03:26 GMT From: pacbell.com!att-out!cbnewsh!cbnewse!cbnewsd!cbnewsc!cbfsb!cbnews!cbnewst! cbnewsm!cbnewsl!willett@decwrl.dec.com (david.c.willett) Subject: Re: Pascal or C as a first lang Message-ID: List-Id: >>From article <1993Sep10.005836.27727@seas.gwu.edu>, by mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu ( Michael Feldman): > Please take discussion of this to comp.edu. > > Mike Feldman {Mike's .sig deleted} Why? The pedagogical componenent of this debate is probably more appropriate there, but I see a larger issue. That being: Which development paradigm is more universially appropriate? We have the Ada/Pascal paradigm or the C paradigm. I think it would be productive to characterize both paradigms and develop the application universe for each. I believe that discussion belongs in this group as we seem to return to it frequently. It comes disguised as a language war "C/C++ vs. Ada because...", or as a "C has while Ada doesn't..." and several other forms. I don't recall seeing any discussions of the form: Here is a specification of system requirements. Design, implement, and maintain a solution for this specification using C++, C, Ada, and Pascal. Compare/contrast the implementation and the maintenance. Perhaps such a discussion cannot occur here. Nonetheless, the exercise would, in my view, be useful for all; Ada proponents and detractors alike. Note: The two paradigms are not language specific, but rather are tied to the design philosophies underlying the languages. Understanding the paradigms requires appreciating those philosophies. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dave Willett AT&T Federal Systems Advanced Technologies The biggest mistake you can make is to believe that you work for someone else. -- Anonymous