4 ms·

And it's so much better to go "Oh, this is so much easier than C!" rather than "Oh, this is so much worse than Python!" later on. It also tends to be easier to

by req2 17y ago

And it's so much better to go "Oh, this is so much easier than C!" rather than "Oh, this is so much worse than Python!" later on. It also tends to be easier to learn a new, easier way to do something in a new language than figure out the harder way with the easy way looming on the top of your mind.

lucastx 17y ago
So, why don't you learn assembly first? Better, why don't you start with logic circuits?
- slackerIII 17y ago
  That's called reductio ad absurdum. Perhaps C offers a sweet spot of being able to accomplish something with minimal effort, but still gaining a deep understanding of what the computer is actually doing.
- scrod 17y ago
  Those are actually good ideas, and if you received a computer science degree from Carnegie Mellon University, you may have witnessed first hand their actualization in CS 213, Introduction to Computer Systems: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/academic/class/15213-f01/www/ http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/academic/class/15213-f01/www/ From the syllabus: 1. Int’s are not integers, Float’s are not reals. Our ﬁnite representations of numbers have signiﬁcant limitations, and because of these limitations we sometimes have to think in terms of bit-level representations. 2. You’ve got to know assembly language. Even if you never write programs in assembly, The behavior of a program cannot be understood sometimes purely based on the abstraction of a high-level language. Further, understanding the effects of bugs requires familiarity with the machine-level model. 3. Memory matters. Computer memory is not unbounded. It must be allocated and managed. Memory referencing errors are especially pernicious. An erroneous updating of one object can cause a change in some logically unrelated object. Also, the combination of caching and virtual memory provides the functionality of a uniform unbounded address space, but not the performance. 4. There is more to performance than asymptotic complexity. Constant factors also matter. There are systematic ways to evaluate and improve program performance 5. Computers do more than execute instructions. They also need to get data in and out and they interact with other systems over networks.
  - keefe 17y ago
    That's a 200 level class, as far as I know there is always a CS1 100 level class that usually starts with some EXTREMELY high level language, sometimes a metalanguage just for the class itself? I heard somewhere Python is in style for this. Here is one such course : http://www.academicearth.org/courses/introduction-to-computer-science-i http://www.academicearth.org/courses/introduction-to-compute... *EDIT - I made a stupid comment... they have C assignments in that class. I'll leave it for others amusement. I have seen that style of starting with a high level language though...
    - joshu 17y ago
      15-100. Genie Pascal. Oh god, the pain.
  - fortes 17y ago
    Although I'm not a fan of lower-level programming (I'm a UI guy), I loved 15-213. One of my favorite (and best-taught) courses.
- tsuraan 17y ago
  Assembly's too high-level :) In my school's sophomore year, CS majors are required to implement a CPU on an FPGA; the instruction set, CPU architecture, everything are up to the student groups to design and implement. At the end of the class, all the student processors are compared w.r.t. size and speed of execution of various simple programs. Our group had a guy that wrote an assembler for our ISA, but most of the groups just wrote their programs in raw machine code, using a hex editor. Really, nothing teaches low-level programming better than starting with gates and building your way up to programs. The sequel to that class teaches how to deal with pipelining, CPU caches, and multiple-execution chips like the TI DSPs, so after you design your processor, you get to see how real CPUs work. It's really fun, actually.
  - aaronblohowiak 17y ago
    Where did you go?
    - randallsquared 17y ago
      When my ex-wife was going to Florida Institute of Technology 10 years ago, she was required to do this. It might not be that way now. :)
    - tsuraan 17y ago
      Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. It's a small place in Indiana, but I think it's a pretty good school :)
  - mncaudill 17y ago
    That actually sounds fantastic. Do you remember what book(s) you used in the class?
    - ellism 17y ago
      (I also went to RHIT, fantastic school) The intro computer architecture course used _Computer Organization and Design_ by Patterson and Hennessy. The practical component described here was driven by handouts, I'm not sure the text follows building something like this.
- biohacker42 17y ago
  Well actually I started with logic. Then moved on simple circuits, and-gates, or-gates, nand-gates, eventually simple counters, and then assembly.
radu_floricica 17y ago
I never liked this argument. Doesn't have any inherent limitations, or proper evidence. You can just as easily say "you should not use a washing machine until you understand the pain of washing clothes with cold water". Or you should drive stick before going automatic. Or start programming in assembly, everything will seem easier afterwards. Yes, modern languages are better then C. But they are not perfect. Programmers using them still have a lot of problems to solve and things to learn. It's just different things then with C, or assembly, or wiring transistors by hand. You have to face it, pointer arithmetic, while tremendously important in C, isn't really very useful in other languages. Knowing when the gc likes to start collecting on the other hand may be a good piece of information.
- windsurfer 17y ago
  Wouldn't it be silly if a grown man got a bit of mud on his shoes and yelled "OH NO" and ran out of the room to the nearest washing machine to get his entire suit cleaned? In my experience, these are the actionscript-only coders, the people who only ever learned higher-level languages. They'll spawn a whole new object just to store a temporary number, or other silly things. They don't think it's silly, though. They don't know what's going on behind the scenes.

by req2 17y ago

lucastx 17y ago

So, why don't you learn assembly first? Better, why don't you start with logic circuits?

slackerIII 17y ago
That's called reductio ad absurdum. Perhaps C offers a sweet spot of being able to accomplish something with minimal effort, but still gaining a deep understanding of what the computer is actually doing.
scrod 17y ago
Those are actually good ideas, and if you received a computer science degree from Carnegie Mellon University, you may have witnessed first hand their actualization in CS 213, Introduction to Computer Systems: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/academic/class/15213-f01/www/ http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/academic/class/15213-f01/www/ From the syllabus: 1. Int’s are not integers, Float’s are not reals. Our ﬁnite representations of numbers have signiﬁcant limitations, and because of these limitations we sometimes have to think in terms of bit-level representations. 2. You’ve got to know assembly language. Even if you never write programs in assembly, The behavior of a program cannot be understood sometimes purely based on the abstraction of a high-level language. Further, understanding the effects of bugs requires familiarity with the machine-level model. 3. Memory matters. Computer memory is not unbounded. It must be allocated and managed. Memory referencing errors are especially pernicious. An erroneous updating of one object can cause a change in some logically unrelated object. Also, the combination of caching and virtual memory provides the functionality of a uniform unbounded address space, but not the performance. 4. There is more to performance than asymptotic complexity. Constant factors also matter. There are systematic ways to evaluate and improve program performance 5. Computers do more than execute instructions. They also need to get data in and out and they interact with other systems over networks.
- keefe 17y ago
  That's a 200 level class, as far as I know there is always a CS1 100 level class that usually starts with some EXTREMELY high level language, sometimes a metalanguage just for the class itself? I heard somewhere Python is in style for this. Here is one such course : http://www.academicearth.org/courses/introduction-to-computer-science-i http://www.academicearth.org/courses/introduction-to-compute... *EDIT - I made a stupid comment... they have C assignments in that class. I'll leave it for others amusement. I have seen that style of starting with a high level language though...
  - joshu 17y ago
    15-100. Genie Pascal. Oh god, the pain.
- fortes 17y ago
  Although I'm not a fan of lower-level programming (I'm a UI guy), I loved 15-213. One of my favorite (and best-taught) courses.
tsuraan 17y ago
Assembly's too high-level :) In my school's sophomore year, CS majors are required to implement a CPU on an FPGA; the instruction set, CPU architecture, everything are up to the student groups to design and implement. At the end of the class, all the student processors are compared w.r.t. size and speed of execution of various simple programs. Our group had a guy that wrote an assembler for our ISA, but most of the groups just wrote their programs in raw machine code, using a hex editor. Really, nothing teaches low-level programming better than starting with gates and building your way up to programs. The sequel to that class teaches how to deal with pipelining, CPU caches, and multiple-execution chips like the TI DSPs, so after you design your processor, you get to see how real CPUs work. It's really fun, actually.
- aaronblohowiak 17y ago
  Where did you go?
  - randallsquared 17y ago
    When my ex-wife was going to Florida Institute of Technology 10 years ago, she was required to do this. It might not be that way now. :)
  - tsuraan 17y ago
    Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. It's a small place in Indiana, but I think it's a pretty good school :)
- mncaudill 17y ago
  That actually sounds fantastic. Do you remember what book(s) you used in the class?
  - ellism 17y ago
    (I also went to RHIT, fantastic school) The intro computer architecture course used _Computer Organization and Design_ by Patterson and Hennessy. The practical component described here was driven by handouts, I'm not sure the text follows building something like this.
biohacker42 17y ago
Well actually I started with logic. Then moved on simple circuits, and-gates, or-gates, nand-gates, eventually simple counters, and then assembly.

radu_floricica 17y ago

I never liked this argument. Doesn't have any inherent limitations, or proper evidence. You can just as easily say "you should not use a washing machine until you understand the pain of washing clothes with cold water". Or you should drive stick before going automatic. Or start programming in assembly, everything will seem easier afterwards. Yes, modern languages are better then C. But they are not perfect. Programmers using them still have a lot of problems to solve and things to learn. It's just different things then with C, or assembly, or wiring transistors by hand. You have to face it, pointer arithmetic, while tremendously important in C, isn't really very useful in other languages. Knowing when the gc likes to start collecting on the other hand may be a good piece of information.

windsurfer 17y ago
Wouldn't it be silly if a grown man got a bit of mud on his shoes and yelled "OH NO" and ran out of the room to the nearest washing machine to get his entire suit cleaned? In my experience, these are the actionscript-only coders, the people who only ever learned higher-level languages. They'll spawn a whole new object just to store a temporary number, or other silly things. They don't think it's silly, though. They don't know what's going on behind the scenes.