> Robomartin: I learned in C. I also find C to be superior to e.g. Java for learning data structures and algorithms. On the other hand you are losing this argum

> Robomartin: I learned in C. I also find C to be superior to e.g. Java for learning data structures and algorithms. On the other hand you are losing this argument I appreciate your sentiment. However, I think you made the mistake of assuming that there is an argument here. :) I find that most software engineers who, if I may use the phrase, "know their shit", understand the value of coming-up from low level code very well. I have long given-up on the idea of making everyone understand this. Some get it, some don't. Some are receptive to reason, others are not. I am working on what I think is an interesting project. Next summer I hope to launch a local effort to start a tech summer camp for teenagers. Of course, we will, among other things, teach programming. They are going to start with C in the context of robotics. I have been teaching my kid using the excellent RobotC from CMU. This package hides some of the robotics sausage-making but it is still low-level enough to be very useful. After that we might move them to real C with a small embedded project on something like a Microchip PIC or an 8051 derivative. In fact, I am actually thinking really hard about the idea of teaching them microcode. The raw concept would be to actually design a very simple 4 bit microprocessor with an equally simple ALU and sequencer. The kids could then set the bit patterns in the instruction sequencer to create a set of simple machine language instructions. This is very do-able if you keep it super-simple. It is also really satisfying to see something like that actually execute code and work. From that to understanding low-level constructs in C is a very easy step. After C we would move to Java using the excellent GreenFoot framework. So, the idea at this point would be Microcode -> RobotC -> full C -> Java. Anyone interested in this please contact me privately.