Re: Fun with C

["Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org>]

On 4/22/2011 7:08 PM, Elias Salom�o Helou Neto wrote:

>
> Only for the record, my current students are not supposed to become
> professional programmers, but physicists.

For physics programming, there are much better systems than C.

C makes one think more about 'coding' than about the problem itself,
which is what one should be thinking about, instead of pointers and
casting problems.

I suggest the following alternatives as better for physics students:

1. Mathematica: symbolic and numerical and graphics all integrated.
2. Matlab: Simple to program, but less symbolic, but good for computational
physics.
3. Maple: Similar to Mathematica, but Mathematica is based on functional
programming, Maple is more procedural.
4. Many other open/free alternatives to the above: Octave, Sage, Maxima, etc..

I think C is the worst language to choose to teach students
programming in physics, or any other subject, other than operating
systems and drivers may be.

>
> C is terrible for teaching, but it is not up to me to decide which
> language to teach in those introductory classes.
>
> Elias.

But you are the teacher, so ofcourse it is up to you. If
it is not up the teacher to choose the language to teach with,
then you are teaching at the wrong university.

This is like saying it is not up to the doctor to decide which
medicine should be given to the sick person.

regards,
--Nasser