RE: Re: [seul-edu] Perl for 9th graders]

[nbarne - Nathan Barnes <nbarne@acxiom.com>]

You're probably right about the LOGO language itself, though it is certainly
better than the Apple BASIC that they considered teaching us instead.  I was
referring more to the fact that it was an interpreted language with a nifty
turtle interface.  The same interface can be applied to a more modern
language fairly easily.  I wrote a crude version using Python and Gtk for my
own amusement (and to help me learn Python) some time ago.

I prefer an interpreted language for the first stages of learning because it
is possible to see immediate results, and it is not necessary to learn about
the full compilation and development cycle up front.  Some might consider
this to be a Bad Thing, though.  %^)

--
Nathan Barnes
nbarne@acxiom.com
P.S.:  Yes, I know I'm using Outlook (sigh) as a mail client.  The company
seems to be of the opinion that 'We spent a lot of money on these sloppy
Wind-Up2K mail systems, and by Bob, you're going to use them!'


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Hedemark [mailto:hedemark@bops.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 2:01 PM
> To: 'seul-edu@seul.org'
> Subject: RE: Re: [seul-edu] Perl for 9th graders]
> 
> 
> Python is a good language to learn good programming practices, without
> getting into the intricacies of compilers or memory management.
> 
> Logo is a neat language but not conducive to good programming 
> skills.  The
> first language a student learns is likely to be the 
> foundation for many
> programming habits in the future.  That's why I think it is 
> important to
> learn a clean elegant language up front.
> 
> Learning BASIC and COBOL first were the worst things I've 
> ever done.  If I
> had learned something like Pascal first, I'd probably be a 
> programmer today
> instead of a sysadmin.
>