3 ms·
While it is true that I have quite a lot of experience in C-syntax based languages, I've also done quite a bit of Ruby programming, and dabbled in Python as wel
by redhotvengeance 14y ago
While it is true that I have quite a lot of experience in C-syntax based languages, I've also done quite a bit of Ruby programming, and dabbled in Python as well, both of which are nothing like C.
Regardless, I don't see how having programmed in C family languages invalidates the fact that programming is about problem solving, not syntax.
- dagw 14y agoquite a bit of Ruby programming, and dabbled in Python as well, both of which are nothing like C. I'd say they're quite similar to C family languages in that they're both largely imperative languages with OO support and a smattering of functional features. If you want to see something that's nothing like C I'd look at something non-imperative like Prolog or Haskell. Once you've done that you'll see how much Ruby and Python actually resemble the C-family of languages.
- redhotvengeance 14y agoFair enough. When viewed from a use-case perspective, I suppose you could claim that Ruby and Python are similar to C family languages. I actually have started exploring Haskell recently, and clearly functional programming languages require a different thought process than imperative languages. I'd still assert, however, that the difference in thought process is a growth in the theory of programming, or what I called the "0%". That's why many programmers find it hard to learn functional languages - it requires a great deal of conceptual learning. It has very little to do with the syntax.