5 ms·
This is why I support exposing new programmers to Basic: unlearning bad ideas is a core skill we should start developing early.
by bcoates 13y ago
This is why I support exposing new programmers to Basic: unlearning bad ideas is a core skill we should start developing early.
- ilyanep 13y agoI think Dijkstra just rolled in his grave a bit.
- aswanson 13y agoIm guessing youre being sarcástic, but Basic should not be visited upon any human you wish no harm done to. It was a pox on a generation of programmers, foisted upon us under the guise of 'lets expose kids to computers! Thats a Good Thing!'
- derefr 13y agoThat's a fascinating idea. Reminds me of http://lesswrong.com/lw/us/the_ritual/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/us/the_ritual/
- aswanson 13y agoStarting a programmer off in BASIC is akin to starting an English major off in ebonics.
- arundelo 13y agoNot a very good analogy. [...] a very particular piece of grammar, expressing a nuance that standard English leaves to context. Black English is a seemingly still water that runs deep. http://www.theroot.com/views/why-dea-needs-ebonics-translators http://www.theroot.com/views/why-dea-needs-ebonics-translato...
- aswanson 13y agoI stand corrected, good link. Nonetheless, would still wish Basic never entered my life.
- tzs 13y agoThis reminds me a bit of something a chess teacher named Richard Shorman said. In the late '80s and early '90s, Shorman was at the LERA chess club in Sunnyvale where each week people would bring their games and Shorman would go over them and advise them how to improve. Shorman was particularly good at getting players who were stuck in the 1800-2200 USCF rating range moving again. One of the big reasons people get stuck is that they are trying to play too good. They are trying to apply deep positional concepts they learn from reading annotated grandmaster games, or reading books with titles like "Play Like a Grandmaster!". They are planning openings developed by grandmasters for use against grandmasters. That's fine for grandmasters--because grandmasters UNDERSTAND what is going on. All of those deep positional concepts that shape grandmaster thought are ultimately designed to lead to a tactical advantage over their opponent, or to prevent bad tactical things from happening to them. To understand the positional stuff, you have to thoroughly understand the underlying tactics. Shorman would steer these stuck players toward a more aggressive approach. Play the most aggressive move they can (that you can't see an outright refutation for). Open with gambits that give you a good attack. This worked. As the stuck players got used to the sharp games that arose from this style of play, and came to really understand how the pieces worked tactically, they'd start understanding positional play, and be ready to move toward playing good chess. The way Shorman put it was something like this (paraphrased since I can't remember it exactly): before you can play good chess, you have to get good at bad chess.
- Jd 13y agoVery interesting concept. Are there any write-ups of this?