Win a copy of liveProject: Protecting User Data with Spring Security and OAuth2 this week in the Spring forum!
  • Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other Pie Elite all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Paul Clapham
  • Ron McLeod
  • paul wheaton
  • Devaka Cooray
Sheriffs:
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Tim Cooke
  • Liutauras Vilda
Saloon Keepers:
  • Tim Moores
  • Tim Holloway
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Carey Brown
  • Piet Souris
Bartenders:
  • salvin francis
  • Mikalai Zaikin
  • Himai Minh

The Programmer's Brain: From teaching what have you found are the easiest languages to learn

 
Greenhorn
Posts: 19
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
hi Felienne,

From your teaching which languages have you found people pick up easiest ?

And indeed for everyone,  would be interested to hear thoughts.

Do new programmers pick up functional languages quicker than OOP ?

And what is your favourite new language ( or newer language ), I keep hearing Kotlin is a great new(ish) language ( I'd like to look at it myself , when I get time ...)
 
Marshal
Posts: 72595
317
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Luke Moloney wrote:. . . Do new programmers pick up functional languages quicker than OOP ? . . .

You are confusing two things, languages and paradigms. It might be possible to learn functional programming faster than object‑oriented, but the languages supporting those paradigms are usually no easier to learn nor more difficult than others. What we sometimes see here, which I don't like, is how easy to seems to be to learn procedural programming. I was taught the procedural paradigm at school when I was eleven, only they didn't say it was procedural programming. They called it algebra. Haven't you noticed how some procedural code looks like school algebra? It seems to take many people (by no means everybody) a long time to make the transition from procedures to objects, even though real‑life thigs do behave in an object‑oriented fashion:-The Unicode escape \u2019 is a posh apostrophe: ’
Remember functional programming is a paradigm, and it takes time and effort to learn a new paradigm.
 
Author
Posts: 13
5
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Great question! I think most languages are hard to learn, each in their own way. It also depends on what you want to do. Like Python might be more useful for data analysis, C++ less so.

I am most excited about my own language Hedy See www.hedycode.com If uses a lot of cognitive concepts I talk about in the book as well, like lowering cognitive load.
 
Campbell Ritchie
Marshal
Posts: 72595
317
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I have never found a programming language hard to learn, but, as I told Charles O'Leary in another thread about half an hour ago, I have struggled with programming principles. I have a suspicion that people can gravitate (agglutinate, stagnate, sediment(!!)) in a procedural mindset, snd as I said earlier, that can sometimes be difficult to break.
 
Rancher
Posts: 959
23
Netbeans IDE Oracle MySQL Database Tomcat Server C++ Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Luke,

the language is just another hammer... they all have the same basic functionality... but the concept of how that functionality is applied is the real training.  i have always went through languages like a fish in water: originally it was Basic, and then Assembler.  I have since done about every major language and script that has flashed across the pan, with even some digression into machine code at one time (actually numbers and not the nice Assembler syntax).  Along the way it has always been how to apply the overall programming paradigm that brings the sweat to the brow.

pick a language that is popular in your area, and see how it fits.

Les
 
Luke Moloney
Greenhorn
Posts: 19
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
good thoughts all .

I like the idea of gradual learning with

hedycode

Felienne, must have a look when I get a chance, sounds like it would be great for learners and junior developers ( in fact it would be nice to turn off some features in a language like Java just for junior developers until they understand OOP abit!)

I think one of the problems with a language like Java and an approach like OOP is there is alot to get your head around for people to understand (I've worked in Java for nearly 20 years on and off)

It seems to take many people (by no means everybody) a long time to make the transition from procedures to objects



good point Campbell.

Totally agree Les,

the language is just another hammer

like you say and they are all pretty similar really.


I've programmed in Java ,PHP and Javascript mainly.

But I've heard good things about Kotlin reduces alot of the boiler plate of Java ( I guess you get more that what you need todo , rather than how todo it - similar to the imperative / declarative debate I guess).

 
Bartender
Posts: 1088
19
Mac OS X IntelliJ IDE Oracle Spring VI Editor Tomcat Server Redhat Java Linux
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Reminds me of the term "CandyGrammar", from the Jargon Lexicon

candygrammar: n.
A programming language grammar that is mostly syntactic sugar; the term is also a play on ‘candygram’. COBOL, Apple's Hypertalk language, and a lot of the so-called ‘4GL’ database languages share this property. The usual intent of such designs is that they are as English-like as possible, on the theory that they will then be easier for unskilled people to program. This intention comes to grief on the reality that syntax isn't what makes programming hard; it's the mental effort and organization required to specify an algorithm precisely that costs. Thus the invariable result is that ‘candygrammar’ languages are just as difficult to program in as terser ones, and far more painful for the experienced hacker.

 
Campbell Ritchie
Marshal
Posts: 72595
317
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator

Peter Rooke wrote:. . . ‘candygram’ . . . .

Sweet!

At risk of being thrown out to MD, is that candygram as in “Candygram for Mongo”?
 
Les Morgan
Rancher
Posts: 959
23
Netbeans IDE Oracle MySQL Database Tomcat Server C++ Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Luke,

I used to really like Java, until Oracle decided to make it into C# and run for an MS twin.  I am more and more thinking, and this is probably because I'm in a MS shop and near retirement, that Java, the new versions, are just not worth trying to keep up with when I already know a perfectly good C# and use it in my daily development effort.  Why should I learn, or try to mutate and keep up with, Oracle C#?  (they still call it Java, but it's more C# like now that C# was ever Java like)

Les

Luke Moloney wrote:good thoughts all .

Totally agree Les,

the language is just another hammer

like you say and they are all pretty similar really.

 
With a little knowledge, a cast iron skillet is non-stick and lasts a lifetime.
reply
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic