4 ms·
Yes, javascript has some quirks. But most bootcamps are trying to get their students from "zero to employable developer" in a very short amount of time, and "em
by whakim 5y ago
Yes, javascript has some quirks. But most bootcamps are trying to get their students from "zero to employable developer" in a very short amount of time, and "employable entry-level developer" is almost always synonymous with "employable entry-level web developer". Given that mandate, you basically have to teach people the basics of web applications, which means talking about what happens on the client, which means javascript. And at that point, it's pretty reasonable to not spend your limited time teaching them a whole other language, especially because Node is extremely popular at the kinds of places your students are likely to work.
Also, most languages have quirks. What are you going to teach them? Python, which also has almost 30 years of baggage? Java, which requires you to spend significantly more time to produce basic functionality? Haskell, so they can gloat about the power of purity and monads on Hacker News?
I understand that javascript might not be the ideal intro language in theory. But I think it probably is the best one in the bootcamp specific use case.
- AlchemistCamp 5y agoBetter yet would be Ruby. It's much more beginner friendly and is a thoroughly consistent OO language—i.e., everything is an object, including numbers and strings. Ruby's also got a much better web dev story, which is good for junior devs (without ML and/or infrastructure backgrounds) who are looking to enter the market. After learning Ruby, either JS or Java could be a great 2nd language.
- whakim 5y agoI certainly don't think Ruby is indefensible. I think it's possible to get a lot done with Ruby, and I think that's very valuable for new developers who need to learn a lot in a very limited amount of time. But I don't think that addresses the elephant in the room: junior web developers have to deal with the frontend, and that means javascript. So why waste (very limited time) teaching them a second language too? > It's much more beginner friendly and is a thoroughly consistent OO language—i.e., everything is an object, including numbers and strings. This sort of thing occurs to you and me and makes sense because we have a broader understanding of software engineering. In practice, I just don't think "everything is an object" means much to someone who's a month into a bootcamp.
- sam0x17 5y agoI drool over the curriculums at bootcamps that use Ruby (like Lambda School and Ironclad). Alas, the one I mentor in does everything in js/react with a little bit of python sprinkled in.
- AlchemistCamp 5y agoMy perspective comes from having found Ruby a lot easier as a (mostly) beginner after having mostly just used Flash than I found JavaScript 2 years later when I decided to move to the front-end. Since that time, JavaScript has become considerably more complex as new features have been added and its ecosystem has grown. IMO learning very beginner-friendly language like Ruby to a low-intermediate level first actually speeds up the process of getting to an employable level with a more difficult language like JS.
- sam0x17 5y agoYes, but to be good at JavaScript, I think you need to learn another language first.
- whakim 5y agoI don't think a bootcamp is going to be able to teach you to be "good at" javascript (or any other language). Think back to when you'd been programming for 1 or 2 months. I'd wager there were lots of things that didn't totally make sense and some magic here and there that you didn't fully understand. It takes time - more time than a bootcamp has - to teach that deeper understanding which allows you to be "good." A bootcamp teaches you to be functional.