Hi. I'm looking to take a computer programming class. From what I've
read, Java is the most in-demand language, job wise.  Is this
accurate, or would you recommend something else. I took a couple
classes in C+ several years ago. I don't remember much of anything
regarding that syntax, but I picked it up quickly. It's my
understanding that most of the iPhone and Android Apps are written in
Java, as well as a lot of web based scripts. Any suggestions on what
path I should take would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
-Adam

On 6/11/2012 9:23 PM, adam79 wrote:
> Hi. I'm looking to take a computer programming class. From what I've
> read, Java is the most in-demand language, job wise.  Is this
> accurate, or would you recommend something else. I took a couple
> classes in C+ several years ago. I don't remember much of anything
> regarding that syntax, but I picked it up quickly. It's my
> understanding that most of the iPhone and Android Apps are written in
> Java, as well as a lot of web based scripts. Any suggestions on what
> path I should take would be greatly appreciated.
>

it is C++ (not "C+"), but there is also C (technically a different 
language, but many people lump C and C++ together).

C, C++, and Java are currently the top 3 most popular languages, roughly 
followed by C#.

iPhone apps are largely written in Objective-C.



> Thanks,
> -Adam

Here's a link to the article I read, regarding languages and job
availability: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Management/10-Programming-Languages-You-Should-Learn-Right-Now/

On Jun 12, 12:39=A0am, adam79 <79ada...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here's a link to the article I read, regarding languages and job
> availability:http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Management/10-Programming-Langua=
ges-You-S...

I just noticed that this article was written in 2006! I need to find
something more topical. If I decided to go the C route, which would
you recommend, in terms of jobs? I'm assuming something internet based
would be a smart choice.. right?

adam79 wrote:

> Hi. I'm looking to take a computer programming class. From what I've
> read, Java is the most in-demand language, job wise.  Is this
> accurate, or would you recommend something else. 

This sounds about right.  Java programming does appear to be, at least for 
now, the most sought-out technical skill in demand.

But web developing is also quite in demand, and this doesn't necessarily 
depend on java or C++.


> Any suggestions on what
> path I should take would be greatly appreciated.

My 0,02€ is to invest in a technology which is sufficiently on demand and 
yet not a part of the IT curriculum of your local college.  If you invest 
your time learning a skill which everyone fresh out of college already has 
and has already invested a considerable amount of time developing it then 
you will be at a significant disadvantage.  On the other hand, if you invest 
your time learning a technology which is on demand but isn't taught in any 
college degree then there will be considerably less competition for a job 
spot.


Rui Maciel

On Jun 12, 5:25=A0am, Rui Maciel <rui.mac...@gmail.com> wrote:
> if you invest
> your time learning a technology which is on demand but isn't taught in an=
y
> college degree then there will be considerably less competition for a job
> spot.
>
> Rui Maciel

That's a good idea, but unfortunately I don't know what that
technology is.. any chance you could point me in the right direction?
Thanks.

adam79 <79adam79@gmail.com> writes:

> I'm looking to take a computer programming class.  [...]  Any
> suggestions on what path I should take would be greatly appreciated.

Look into languages which are intended to utilise multi-core (and other
highly parallel) architectures.  Here are a few languages you might want
to consider:

 + Parasail (not popular yet, but definitely future-proofed, when it
   comes to parallelism).

 + Haskell (already quite popular, should work well even on highly
   parallel architectures).

 + Ada (parallel processing built in, but it is the programmer who has
   to do the job of splitting up the program in tasks which can run in
   parallel with each other).

Greetings,

Jacob
-- 
�Later software patents have had a similar effect, they
 force us to stand on each other's toes instead of on each
 other's shoulders.�                       -- Per Abrahamsen

On Jun 15, 9:29=A0am, Jacob Sparre Andersen <spa...@nbi.dk> wrote:
> adam79 <79ada...@gmail.com> writes:
> > I'm looking to take a computer programming class. =A0[...] =A0Any
> > suggestions on what path I should take would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Look into languages which are intended to utilise multi-core (and other
> highly parallel) architectures. =A0Here are a few languages you might wan=
t
> to consider:
>
> =A0+ Parasail (not popular yet, but definitely future-proofed, when it
> =A0 =A0comes to parallelism).
>
> =A0+ Haskell (already quite popular,

Ah, the new LISP. Widely taught, widely admired, rarely used . A quick
search shows it to have
0.5% of the demand Java has.

>should work well even on highly
> =A0 =A0parallel architectures).
>
> =A0+ Ada (parallel processing built in, but it is the programmer who has
> =A0 =A0to do the job of splitting up the program in tasks which can run i=
n
> =A0 =A0parallel with each other).

Been around forever, old fashioned, not suddenly going to become
popular.

You would be better off with modern PP languages like Scala.
Or get to grips with threaded C++, which is nightmarish, but at least
well paid.

On Jun 12, 3:56=A0am, BGB <cr88...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/11/2012 9:23 PM, adam79 wrote:
>
> > Hi. I'm looking to take a computer programming class. From what I've
> > read, Java is the most in-demand language, job wise. =A0Is this
> > accurate, or would you recommend something else. I took a couple
> > classes in C+ several years ago. I don't remember much of anything
> > regarding that syntax, but I picked it up quickly. It's my
> > understanding that most of the iPhone and Android Apps are written in
> > Java, as well as a lot of web based scripts. Any suggestions on what
> > path I should take would be greatly appreciated.
>
> it is C++ (not "C+"), but there is also C (technically a different
> language, but many people lump C and C++ together).
>
> C, C++, and Java are currently the top 3 most popular languages

*General purpose* languages. SQL and the HTML family are also
extremely important.

On Jun 13, 8:18=A0am, adam79 <79ada...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 12, 5:25=A0am, Rui Maciel <rui.mac...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > if you invest
> > your time learning a technology which is on demand but isn't taught in =
any
> > college degree then there will be considerably less competition for a j=
ob
> > spot.
>
> > Rui Maciel
>
> That's a good idea, but unfortunately I don't know what that
> technology is.. any chance you could point me in the right direction?
> Thanks.

Ruby (with Rails) and Python (with Django) are trending.

"gremnebulin" wrote:

> On Jun 15, 9:29 am, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
>> adam79 writes:
>>> I'm looking to take a computer programming class. [...] Any
>>> suggestions on what path I should take would be greatly appreciated.

>> + Ada (parallel processing built in, but it is the programmer who has
>> to do the job of splitting up the program in tasks which can run in
>> parallel with each other).

> Been around forever, old fashioned, not suddenly going to become
> popular.

If you work on military or aerospace projects you'll likely need it.
It's an active language, last revised in 2005 I believe.

> You would be better off with modern PP languages like Scala.
> Or get to grips with threaded C++, which is nightmarish, but at least
> well paid.

See also Ada jobs for "well paid". In my opinion, all programmers
should should know C and at least some C++ - it's a basic thing like
learning to read and write. Much documentation and example code
assumes C knowledge.

Ant wrote:

[ Ada ]

> If you work on military or aerospace projects you'll likely need it.
> It's an active language, last revised in 2005 I believe.

Actually the last revision finished earlier this year (pending final ISO
approval).

> See also Ada jobs for "well paid". In my opinion, all programmers
> should should know C and at least some C++ - it's a basic thing like
> learning to read and write. Much documentation and example code
> assumes C knowledge.

Definitely true for APIs.  Algoritms still seem to be documented in
Pascal-like pseudo-code, but I'm not sure you need to learn Pascal to
understand it.

Greetings,

Jacob
-- 
<URL: small-talk://work/hallway-meeting/...>

On Jun 19, 6:44=A0pm, "Ant" <n...@home.today> wrote:
> "gremnebulin" wrote:
> > On Jun 15, 9:29 am, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
> >> adam79 writes:
> >>> I'm looking to take a computer programming class. [...] Any
> >>> suggestions on what path I should take would be greatly appreciated.
> >> + Ada (parallel processing built in, but it is the programmer who has
> >> to do the job of splitting up the program in tasks which can run in
> >> parallel with each other).
> > Been around forever, old fashioned, not suddenly going to become
> > popular.
>
> If you work on military or aerospace projects you'll likely need it

I know. It's a niche language. It is not in effect a general
purpose PP language.

> It's an active language, last revised in 2005 I believe.
>
> > You would be better off with modern PP languages like Scala.
> > Or get to grips with threaded C++, which is nightmarish, but at least
> > well paid.
>
> See also Ada jobs for "well paid". In my opinion, all programmers
> should should know C and at least some C++ - it's a basic thing like
> learning to read and write. Much documentation and example code
> assumes C knowledge.

Fair point.

On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 03:01:40 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:

> On Jun 19, 6:44�pm, "Ant" <n...@home.today> wrote:
>> "gremnebulin" wrote:
>>> On Jun 15, 9:29 am, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
>>>> adam79 writes:
>>>>> I'm looking to take a computer programming class. [...] Any
>>>>> suggestions on what path I should take would be greatly appreciated.
>>>> + Ada (parallel processing built in, but it is the programmer who has
>>>> to do the job of splitting up the program in tasks which can run in
>>>> parallel with each other).
>>> Been around forever, old fashioned, not suddenly going to become
>>> popular.
>>
>> If you work on military or aerospace projects you'll likely need it
> 
> I know. It's a niche language.

Which could be seen is an advantage. Popular languages are awful to learn
and even worse for software development. C is a perfect illustration. Niche
languages enjoy a chance of being more reasonably designed. A good language
simply cannot be popular. Just like food, fine arts, books or movies.
Popularity is a warranty of low quality.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de

On Jun 20, 11:18=A0am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 03:01:40 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
> > On Jun 19, 6:44=A0pm, "Ant" <n...@home.today> wrote:
> >> "gremnebulin" wrote:
> >>> On Jun 15, 9:29 am, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
> >>>> adam79 writes:
> >>>>> I'm looking to take a computer programming class. [...] Any
> >>>>> suggestions on what path I should take would be greatly appreciated=
..
> >>>> + Ada (parallel processing built in, but it is the programmer who ha=
s
> >>>> to do the job of splitting up the program in tasks which can run in
> >>>> parallel with each other).
> >>> Been around forever, old fashioned, not suddenly going to become
> >>> popular.
>
> >> If you work on military or aerospace projects you'll likely need it
>
> > I know. It's a niche language.
>
> Which could be seen is an advantage

If you like the niche,which the OP gave no sign of doing.

It has got to be bad advice to tell someone to learn
a language that might condemn them to working in a field
they hate.

>. Popular languages are awful to learn

What *all* of them? That's pretty damn sweeping.

> and even worse for software development. C is a perfect illustration.

Of what? It beat a number of rivals, it's widely and successfully
used; whilst it is flawed,
it's pitfalls are very well known. And, nowadays, it is effectively a
niche language too.

> Niche
> languages

Popular and niche are not the only alternatives. You can have less
popular general purposes languages. For instance ruby, which is said
to be a joy to learn.

> enjoy a chance of being more reasonably designed. A good language
> simply cannot be popular. Just like food, fine arts, books or movies.
> Popularity is a warranty of low quality.

Oh right. You haven't surveyed all the popular languages, you are just
arguing from
general snobbery.

On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:12:07 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:

> On Jun 20, 11:18�am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 03:01:40 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
>>> On Jun 19, 6:44�pm, "Ant" <n...@home.today> wrote:
>>>> "gremnebulin" wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 15, 9:29 am, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
>>>>>> adam79 writes:
>>>>>>> I'm looking to take a computer programming class. [...] Any
>>>>>>> suggestions on what path I should take would be greatly appreciated.
>>>>>> + Ada (parallel processing built in, but it is the programmer who has
>>>>>> to do the job of splitting up the program in tasks which can run in
>>>>>> parallel with each other).
>>>>> Been around forever, old fashioned, not suddenly going to become
>>>>> popular.
>>
>>>> If you work on military or aerospace projects you'll likely need it
>>
>>> I know. It's a niche language.
>>
>> Which could be seen is an advantage
> 
> If you like the niche,which the OP gave no sign of doing.
> 
> It has got to be bad advice to tell someone to learn
> a language that might condemn them to working in a field
> they hate.

For a professional software designer mastery of a new language is a matter
of month or so. He must understand basic concepts of software design. These
are invariant to any language even across few programming paradigms. The OP
should better start with a language which does not stand in the way. There
is the famous saying Dijkstra made about Basic (a popular language):

"It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that
have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are
mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration."

>>. Popular languages are awful to learn
> 
> What *all* of them? That's pretty damn sweeping.

There is only a dozen or so really popular languages. None of them is any
good. The point was about this as a law, rather than mere empiric
observation.

> Oh right. You haven't surveyed all the popular languages, you are just
> arguing from general snobbery.

True. Professionalism in any area is in the end a snobbery. Software
engineering is not an exclusion from this general rule.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de

On Jun 20, 7:59=A0pm, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:12:07 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
> > On Jun 20, 11:18=A0am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> > wrote:
> >> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 03:01:40 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
> >>> On Jun 19, 6:44=A0pm, "Ant" <n...@home.today> wrote:
> >>>> "gremnebulin" wrote:
> >>>>> On Jun 15, 9:29 am, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
> >>>>>> adam79 writes:
> >>>>>>> I'm looking to take a computer programming class. [...] Any
> >>>>>>> suggestions on what path I should take would be greatly appreciat=
ed.
> >>>>>> + Ada (parallel processing built in, but it is the programmer who =
has
> >>>>>> to do the job of splitting up the program in tasks which can run i=
n
> >>>>>> parallel with each other).
> >>>>> Been around forever, old fashioned, not suddenly going to become
> >>>>> popular.
>
> >>>> If you work on military or aerospace projects you'll likely need it
>
> >>> I know. It's a niche language.
>
> >> Which could be seen is an advantage
>
> > If you like the niche,which the OP gave no sign of doing.
>
> > It has got to be bad advice to tell someone to learn
> > a language that might condemn them to working in a field
> > they hate.
>
> For a professional software designer mastery of a new language is a matte=
r
> of month or so.

No, not mastery. Acquaintance. And how is that relevant anyway? The OP
is not someone who has 10 languages under his belt. S/he is
essentially
in the position, as beginners are, of learning programming itself and
a language
at the same time.

>He must understand basic concepts of software design. These
> are invariant to any language even across few programming paradigms. The =
OP
> should better start with a language which does not stand in the way. Ther=
e
> is the famous saying Dijkstra made about Basic (a popular language):
>
> "It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that
> have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are
> mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration."

How is that relevant? Did I tell the OP to learn BASIC, a language I
have used
extensively, and despise?

> >>. Popular languages are awful to learn
>
> > What *all* of them? That's pretty damn sweeping.
>
> There is only a dozen or so really popular languages. None of them is any
> good.

Name a really good language.

> The point was about this as a law, rather than mere empiric
> observation.
>
> > Oh right. You haven't surveyed all the popular languages, you are just
> > arguing from general snobbery.
>
> True. Professionalism in any area is in the end a snobbery. Software
> engineering is not an exclusion from this general rule.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Dmitry A. Kazakovhttp://www.dmitry-kazakov.de

On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 12:15:15 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:

> On Jun 20, 7:59�pm, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:12:07 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
>>> On Jun 20, 11:18�am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 03:01:40 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 19, 6:44�pm, "Ant" <n...@home.today> wrote:
>>>>>> "gremnebulin" wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jun 15, 9:29 am, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
>>>>>>>> adam79 writes:
>>>>>>>>> I'm looking to take a computer programming class. [...] Any
>>>>>>>>> suggestions on what path I should take would be greatly appreciated.
>>>>>>>> + Ada (parallel processing built in, but it is the programmer who has
>>>>>>>> to do the job of splitting up the program in tasks which can run in
>>>>>>>> parallel with each other).
>>>>>>> Been around forever, old fashioned, not suddenly going to become
>>>>>>> popular.
>>
>>>>>> If you work on military or aerospace projects you'll likely need it
>>
>>>>> I know. It's a niche language.
>>
>>>> Which could be seen is an advantage
>>
>>> If you like the niche,which the OP gave no sign of doing.
>>
>>> It has got to be bad advice to tell someone to learn
>>> a language that might condemn them to working in a field
>>> they hate.
>>
>> For a professional software designer mastery of a new language is a matter
>> of month or so.
> 
> No, not mastery. Acquaintance. And how is that relevant anyway? The OP
> is not someone who has 10 languages under his belt. S/he is essentially
> in the position, as beginners are, of learning programming itself and a language
> at the same time.
> 
>>He must understand basic concepts of software design. These
>> are invariant to any language even across few programming paradigms. The OP
>> should better start with a language which does not stand in the way. There
>> is the famous saying Dijkstra made about Basic (a popular language):
>>
>> "It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that
>> have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are
>> mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration."
> 
> How is that relevant?

One may disagree with Dijkstra's preferences but he is right that the
choice of first language is crucial. My point was that a popular language
would be most likely a poor choice. The OP as a beginner is unable to
critically analyse language properties and separate programming concepts
from their implementations by the language. This comes first with
experience. At that point it will be very difficult to get rid of bad
practices popular language encourage, even if you new them bad.

>>>>. Popular languages are awful to learn
>>
>>> What *all* of them? That's pretty damn sweeping.
>>
>> There is only a dozen or so really popular languages. None of them is any
>> good.
> 
> Name a really good language.

It was already named: Ada. You dismissed it as niche. I countered that
popularity as well as whether the language would be used by potential
employers do not matter.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de

On Jun 20, 9:53 pm, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 12:15:15 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
> > On Jun 20, 7:59 pm, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> > wrote:
> >> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:12:07 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
> >>> On Jun 20, 11:18 am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 03:01:40 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
> >>>>> On Jun 19, 6:44 pm, "Ant" <n...@home.today> wrote:
> >>>>>> "gremnebulin" wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jun 15, 9:29 am, Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote:
> >>>>>>>> adam79 writes:
> >>>>>>>>> I'm looking to take a computer programming class. [...] Any
> >>>>>>>>> suggestions on what path I should take would be greatly appreciated.
> >>>>>>>> + Ada (parallel processing built in, but it is the programmer who has
> >>>>>>>> to do the job of splitting up the program in tasks which can run in
> >>>>>>>> parallel with each other).
> >>>>>>> Been around forever, old fashioned, not suddenly going to become
> >>>>>>> popular.
>
> >>>>>> If you work on military or aerospace projects you'll likely need it
>
> >>>>> I know. It's a niche language.
>
> >>>> Which could be seen is an advantage
>
> >>> If you like the niche,which the OP gave no sign of doing.
>
> >>> It has got to be bad advice to tell someone to learn
> >>> a language that might condemn them to working in a field
> >>> they hate.
>
> >> For a professional software designer mastery of a new language is a matter
> >> of month or so.
>
> > No, not mastery. Acquaintance. And how is that relevant anyway? The OP
> > is not someone who has 10 languages under his belt. S/he is essentially
> > in the position, as beginners are, of learning programming itself and a language
> > at the same time.
>
> >>He must understand basic concepts of software design. These
> >> are invariant to any language even across few programming paradigms. The OP
> >> should better start with a language which does not stand in the way. There
> >> is the famous saying Dijkstra made about Basic (a popular language):
>
> >> "It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that
> >> have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are
> >> mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration."
>
> > How is that relevant?
>
> One may disagree with Dijkstra's preferences but he is right that the
> choice of first language is crucial.
>My point was that a popular language
> would be most likely a poor choice.

Your point lacks specifics.

> The OP as a beginner is unable to
> critically analyse language properties and separate programming concepts
> from their implementations by the language. This comes first with
> experience. At that point it will be very difficult to get rid of bad
> practices popular language encourage, even if you new them bad.
>
> >>>>. Popular languages are awful to learn
>
> >>> What *all* of them? That's pretty damn sweeping.
>
> >> There is only a dozen or so really popular languages. None of them is any
> >> good.
>
> > Name a really good language.
>
> It was already named: Ada. You dismissed it as niche. I countered that
> popularity as well as whether the language would be used by potential
> employers do not matter.

It matters if you are looking for employment.
I would also be interested in hearing why the large, verbose,
statically
and strongly typed language ADA is so much better than (for instance)
the large, verbose, statically
and strongly typed language Java.  Is Java, often cited as  a
similarly capable language to ADA,
so much worse that it damages thinking?

On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:25:35 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:

> On Jun 20, 9:53 pm, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 12:15:15 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
>>> Name a really good language.
>>
>> It was already named: Ada. You dismissed it as niche. I countered that
>> popularity as well as whether the language would be used by potential
>> employers do not matter.
> 
> It matters if you are looking for employment.

Without any programming experience? I don't know about others, but hiring
fresh people, we do not much care about what they were taught in the
university, because that was garbage anyway. We ask the candidate to
demonstrate an ability to solve some simple programming task in the
language of his or her choice. I also like to ask if he or she can point
any language design problems of that language and give an explanation why.
Critical view is very important for being good programmer. That sort of
things.

> I would also be interested in hearing why the large, verbose, statically
> and strongly typed language ADA is so much better than (for instance)
> the large, verbose, statically and strongly typed language Java.

I don't want to go into language wars.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de

On Jun 21, 9:30=A0pm, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:25:35 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
> > On Jun 20, 9:53 pm, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> > wrote:
> >> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 12:15:15 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
> >>> Name a really good language.
>
> >> It was already named: Ada. You dismissed it as niche. I countered that
> >> popularity as well as whether the language would be used by potential
> >> employers do not matter.
>
> > It matters if you are looking for employment.
>
> Without any programming experience?

It matters if you are looking to learn to programme in one language
and gain employment in that language.

> I don't know about others, but hiring
> fresh people, we do not much care about what they were taught in the
> university, because that was garbage anyway. We ask the candidate to
> demonstrate an ability to solve some simple programming task in the
> language of his or her choice. I also like to ask if he or she can point
> any language design problems of that language and give an explanations wh=
y.
> Critical view is very important for being good programmer. That sort of
> things.

Another generalisation from a  single datum. At least you are
consistent. The majority of job adverts call for N years experience
in language X. I have seen a few that don't, but they are not
entry level.

> > I would also be interested in hearing why the large, verbose, staticall=
y
> > and strongly typed language ADA is so much better than (for instance)
> > the large, verbose, statically and strongly typed language Java.
>
> I don't want to go into language wars.

Beyond firing the first shot.

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 04:45:30 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:

> On Jun 21, 9:30�pm, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 12:25:35 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
>>> On Jun 20, 9:53 pm, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 12:15:15 -0700 (PDT), gremnebulin wrote:
>>>>> Name a really good language.
>>
>>>> It was already named: Ada. You dismissed it as niche. I countered that
>>>> popularity as well as whether the language would be used by potential
>>>> employers do not matter.
>>
>>> It matters if you are looking for employment.
>>
>> Without any programming experience?
> 
> It matters if you are looking to learn to programme in one language
> and gain employment in that language.

No, it does not. No experience = no experience.

>> I don't know about others, but hiring
>> fresh people, we do not much care about what they were taught in the
>> university, because that was garbage anyway. We ask the candidate to
>> demonstrate an ability to solve some simple programming task in the
>> language of his or her choice. I also like to ask if he or she can point
>> any language design problems of that language and give an explanations why.
>> Critical view is very important for being good programmer. That sort of
>> things.
> 
> Another generalisation from a single datum.

Better than nothing.

> At least you are
> consistent. The majority of job adverts call for N years experience
> in language X.

You have to write something there. Actually we indeed list some most
popular languages just in order not to scare potential candidates out. It
does not mean that we wanted only candidates experienced in something like
Java. Rather he must be prepared to pull himself together and switch to
Java, or, for that matter. to Brainfuck, if one our customers demanded that
for some particular project. Programmer like a physician should not be
squeamish. (:-))

>>> I would also be interested in hearing why the large, verbose, statically
>>> and strongly typed language ADA is so much better than (for instance)
>>> the large, verbose, statically and strongly typed language Java.
>>
>> I don't want to go into language wars.
> 
> Beyond firing the first shot.

firing back, just firing back! (:-))

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de

In article <8874e4f0-3acf-45c4-ab0c-c7eff0bd319e@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com>,
gremnebulin  <peterdjones@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 20, 9:53 pm, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:

[ snip ]

> > It was already named: Ada. You dismissed it as niche. I countered that
> > popularity as well as whether the language would be used by potential
> > employers do not matter.
> 
> It matters if you are looking for employment.
> I would also be interested in hearing why the large, verbose,
> statically
> and strongly typed language ADA is so much better than (for instance)

Nitpick:  Ada, not ADA.  It's not an acronym.  (The person who mentioned
it got it right.  Why the change .... )

> the large, verbose, statically
> and strongly typed language Java.  Is Java, often cited as  a
> similarly capable language to ADA,
> so much worse that it damages thinking?

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.

On Wednesday, June 20, 2012 11:59:06 AM UTC-7, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
.....

> For a professional software designer mastery of a new language is a matte=
r
> of month or so. He must understand basic concepts of software design. The=
se
> are invariant to any language even across few programming paradigms. The =
OP
> should better start with a language which does not stand in the way. Ther=
e
> is the famous saying Dijkstra made about Basic (a popular language):
>=20
> "It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students =
that
> have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are
> mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration."

(snipped)

I have to agree with the idea that most* variations BASIC are bad. When I w=
as young BASIC was taught to me as my first programming language. Specifica=
lly, Commodore Business Machines licensed use of Microsoft's BASIC - was wh=
at I used to design my programs on Commodore's PET 2001 series, Vic-20, Com=
modore 64, and Amiga 500. I had to break away from using BASIC when I disco=
vered at one time, using AmigaBASIC (another license of Microsoft) was gene=
rating a list of 35 * 200 unique text based pseudo-names which took aprox. =
35 minutes for each set of 200 names on a 8 mHz M68000 on the Amiga compute=
r, for a total of 14+ hours.
It was sickening slow.=20

I decided then that I had to brainwash myself with C. It took me 3 times to=
 reread a book on C to switch to thinking in C. I can remember a few comman=
ds from the Commodore 64 such as RUN, NEW, LIST, END, GOTO and POKE 646,1 ,=
 and some SYS functions that reset the computer. I never want to use BASIC =
or Visual BASIC for that matter. The only break through for BASIC on the Am=
iga was not having to use line numbers. I personally think that C should be=
 the first language a person should learn for programming. Actually any pro=
gramming language other than BASIC would be better.=20

I would have to say that COBOL (original version), Algol (original version)=
, Pascal, Modula-2, Fortran (original version), PILOT, smalltalk, and Assem=
bly for Motorola's M68xxx family of processors, are dead and/or obsolete in=
 the computer software industry.=20

*note: There is only one version of BASIC that I can condone for use on PCs=
, BlitzBASIC ( but its now no longer BASIC ) - as BlitzMAX and etc.  =20

<lordwilliams1972@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:72cb86f8-4d34-4348-9d68-fb8e0395581b@googlegroups.com...
> On Wednesday, June 20, 2012 11:59:06 AM UTC-7, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> ....
>
>> For a professional software designer mastery of a new language is a
>> matter
>> of month or so. He must understand basic concepts of software design.
>> These
>> are invariant to any language even across few programming paradigms. The
>> OP
>> should better start with a language which does not stand in the way.
>> There
>> is the famous saying Dijkstra made about Basic (a popular language):
>>
>> &quot;It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students
>> that
>> have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are
>> mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.&quot;

(So anyone who's ever had to write a set of step-by-step instructions, which
is what Basic mostly was, can never be a (good) programmer?)

>I had to break away from using BASIC when I discovered at one time, using
>AmigaBASIC (another license of Microsoft) was generating a list of 35 * 200
>unique text based pseudo-names which took aprox. 35 minutes for each set of
>200 names on a 8 mHz M68000 on the Amiga computer, for a total of 14+
>hours.
> It was sickening slow.

> I decided then that I had to brainwash myself with C. It took me 3 times
> to reread a book on C to switch to thinking in C. I can remember a few

It sounds just a bad implementation. How long did C take on the same
machine? Did it use the same algorithm? Suppose it was C that was taking 14
hours, and Basic that was faster; would you still prefer to program in C?

-- 
Bartc 

On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 7:53:14 PM UTC+1, Bart wrote:
> <lordwilliams1972@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:72cb86f8-4d34-4348-9d68-fb8e0395581b@googlegroups.com...
> > On Wednesday, June 20, 2012 11:59:06 AM UTC-7, Dmitry A. Kazakov wro=
te:

<snip>

> >> There
> >> is the famous saying Dijkstra made about Basic (a popular language):
> >> "It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students
> >> that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers=20
> >> they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration."

he didn't like COBOL either

> (So anyone who's ever had to write a set of step-by-step instructions,=20
> which is what Basic mostly was, can never be a (good) programmer?)

BASIC (I'm talking Dartmouth-like BASIC with LET and line numbers and GOTO,=
 not the quasi-structured Basics that later appeared) doesn't scale well. P=
eople hack around (or used to) and then think they can program. Then you gi=
ve em something hard (or at least large) and it it all falls to pieces. Dij=
kstra is, of course, wrong. he's indulging in hyperbole to make a point. Pe=
ople can become good (or even great) programs despite early exposure to BAS=
IC.

BASIC has no:-
   - control structures (IF, GOTO)
   - decent data structures (DIM)
   - recursion
   - local data?

It uses line numbers. Things like BBC Basic (still pretty nasty) had powerf=
ul string handling which is nice.

To the original poster, have you looked at Python? A nice language, used on=
 real-world projects and there are JOBS (well recriutment agents keep email=
ing me about it- and I don't even have that much experience with it).

<nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d07dacdf-3c7a-4b2f-af36-17a6212d181e@googlegroups.com...
> On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 7:53:14 PM UTC+1, Bart wrote:
>> On Wednesday, June 20, 2012 11:59:06 AM UTC-7, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> >> There
>> >> is the famous saying Dijkstra made about Basic (a popular language):
>> >> "It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students
>> >> that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers
>> >> they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration."
>
> he didn't like COBOL either

He also said: "Object-oriented programming is an exceptionally bad idea
which could only have originated in California.". Although this time I
agree!

>> (So anyone who's ever had to write a set of step-by-step instructions,
>> which is what Basic mostly was, can never be a (good) programmer?)
>
> BASIC (I'm talking Dartmouth-like BASIC with LET and line numbers and
> GOTO, not the quasi-structured Basics that later appeared) doesn't scale
> well. People hack around (or used to) and then think they can program.
> Then you give em something hard (or at least large) and it it all falls to
> pieces. Dijkstra is, of course, wrong. he's indulging in hyperbole to make
> a point. People can become good (or even great) programs despite early
> exposure to BASIC.
>
> BASIC has no:-
>   - control structures (IF, GOTO)
>   - decent data structures (DIM)
>   - recursion
>   - local data?
>
> It uses line numbers. Things like BBC Basic (still pretty nasty) had
> powerful string handling which is nice.

I'm not aware of any Basic that doesn't have IF, GOTO and DIM; those are the
fundamentals (with LET, INPUT and PRINT) otherwise you won't be able to
program much.

The thing about Basic, is that it has exactly those constructs that you
might employ, to describe some set of instructions or algorithm to a 
non-programmer. So they are 'natural'. I've even seen them on my tax return: 
'if this doesn't apply, then go to section N'!

But you are right in that in doesn't scale well without some structured
programming features.

-- 
Bartc 

BartC <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
> 
> (So anyone who's ever had to write a set of step-by-step instructions, which
> is what Basic mostly was, can never be a (good) programmer?)

The problem with Basic wasn't so much its (typically) interpreted
nature or its use of line-numbers, but its lack of modularisation and
its reliance on unstructured flow control through the use of goto, on
goto, goosub and on gosub. Add in a lack of typing and variable scope,
and you got a real mess real quick.

> It sounds just a bad implementation.

At the time, _all_ the Basic implementations were bad.

While it's true that you might have a bad implementation of a good
language, it's not true that it's all down to the quality of the
implementation and that language doesn't matter. There are aspects of
computer languages that can make good implementations difficult if not
impossible to write, and so the nature of the language will affect the
typical quality of its implementations.

-- 
Leif Roar Moldskred

nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com writes:
>BASIC has no:-
>- control structures (IF, GOTO)

  What? BASIC has no IF and no GOTO?

s/IF, GOTO/only has IF, GOTO/

>- decent data structures (DIM)

  It has dynamic Strings with Garbage Collection, which can be
  exploited to some extend to implement some dynamic data structures.
  In this regard BASIC is more high-level than C.

>- recursion

  It has recursion (10 GOSUB 10), but lacks automatic storage
  (in the sense of C) and conditional evaluation, so the
  recursion cannot be used exploited that much.

>- local data?

  No, except possibly in

DEF FNA(X) = X = 0 ? 1 : FNA( X - 1 )

  (Well, I faked this one, in reality, BASIC has no
  conditional operator. But if it had one, the parameter �X�
  in a DEF-FN statement possibly might be local? I don't know!)

"Leif Roar Moldskred" <leifm@dimnakorr.com> wrote in message 
news:M_ydneLpBotjiZ3NnZ2dnUVZ7vWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> BartC <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>>
>> (So anyone who's ever had to write a set of step-by-step instructions, 
>> which
>> is what Basic mostly was, can never be a (good) programmer?)
>
> The problem with Basic wasn't so much its (typically) interpreted
> nature or its use of line-numbers, but its lack of modularisation and
> its reliance on unstructured flow control through the use of goto, on
> goto, goosub and on gosub. Add in a lack of typing and variable scope,
> and you got a real mess real quick.

Sure. But throwing in the half-dozen control statements need to fix all that 
would have been trivial.

(And who said it didn't having typing? You have, at least, numbers and 
strings, and arrays of those. That's plenty to get started with.)

>> It sounds just a bad implementation.
>
> At the time, _all_ the Basic implementations were bad.
>
> While it's true that you might have a bad implementation of a good
> language, it's not true that it's all down to the quality of the
> implementation and that language doesn't matter. There are aspects of
> computer languages that can make good implementations difficult if not
> impossible to write, and so the nature of the language will affect the
> typical quality of its implementations.

Basic looks, now, ridiculously simple to implement. It appears to use static 
typing, so fast interpreters and simple compilers are easily possible.

But it seems to have got a bad reputation, there is no standardised 
language, and there are bloated monstrosities around such as VB.NET which 
would put anybody off.

-- 
Bartc 

"BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>there is no standardised language

  There are ANSI X3.60-1978, ECMA-55, ANSI X3.113-1987,
  and ECMA-116, and the name is �BASIC�.

"Stefan Ram" <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote in message 
news:BASIC-20120713212335@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de...
> "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>there is no standardised language
>
>  There are ANSI X3.60-1978, ECMA-55, ANSI X3.113-1987,
>  and ECMA-116,

So, which standard is it...?

Actually, the problem may be more to do with this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_BASIC_dialects

There seem to be several hundred. Otherwise, some of those later standards 
do allow structured programming, so I don't know what everyone is 
complaining about.

>and the name is �BASIC�.

Yet you managed to guess what I was talking about? I've seen both BASIC and 
Basic used.

-- 
Bartc 

"BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>"Stefan Ram" <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote in message 
>news:BASIC-20120713212335@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de...
>>"BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>>there is no standardised language
>>There are ANSI X3.60-1978, ECMA-55, ANSI X3.113-1987,
>>and ECMA-116,
>So, which standard is it...?

      �The nice thing about standards is
      that you have so many to choose from.�

    Andrew Stuart Tanenbaum in �Computer Networks�, 2nd ed., p. 254 

>I've seen both BASIC and Basic used.

  And I've seen both �potato� and �potatoe�,
  and both �Java� and �JAVA� used.

  �I've seen BASIC used.�, means that you saw how
  the /programming language/ BASIC was used.

  When you intend to convey instead that you saw how the 
  /word/ �BASIC� was used, you can use quotation marks. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use%E2%80%93mention_distinction

  .

=D7=91=D7=AA=D7=90=D7=A8=D7=99=D7=9A =D7=99=D7=95=D7=9D =D7=A9=D7=99=D7=A9=
=D7=99, 13 =D7=91=D7=99=D7=95=D7=9C=D7=99 2012 20:03:07 UTC+1, =D7=9E=D7=90=
=D7=AA Bart:
> Basic looks, now, ridiculously simple to implement. It appears to use sta=
tic=20
> typing, so fast interpreters and simple compilers are easily possible.
>=20
> But it seems to have got a bad reputation,=20
>
That was the real reason it became so popular. When I wrote my book on scri=
pt interpreters, obviously I chose Basic as the example language, because t=
he interpreter weighs in at around 1000 lines of C, including comments. Ear=
ly microcomputers only had a few kilobytes of ROM, which made Basic the lan=
guge of choice.
--=20
MiniBasic - how to write a script interpreter, by me.
http://www.malcommclean.site11.com/www

=D7=91=D7=AA=D7=90=D7=A8=D7=99=D7=9A =D7=99=D7=95=D7=9D =D7=A9=D7=99=D7=A9=
=D7=99, 13 =D7=91=D7=99=D7=95=D7=9C=D7=99 2012 21:50:38 UTC+1, =D7=9E=D7=90=
=D7=AA Bart:
>=20
> Yet you managed to guess what I was talking about? I've seen both BASIC a=
nd=20
> Basic used.
>=20
The decision was taken by ANSI or some similar body that when a programming=
 language is pronounced as a word, the first letter should be capitalised. =
When it is pronounced as letters all the letters are capitalised.

According to the traditional rules of English language it should be B.A.S.I=
..C (Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code). But that's dropped o=
ut of fashion, due to the modern explosion of acronymns and initialisations=
..

<malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> wrote in message 
news:5afa8427-1c3f-4156-bb80-3939fe31c32b@googlegroups.com...
> בתאריך יום שישי, 13 ביולי 2012 20:03:07 UTC+1, מאת Bart:
>> Basic looks, now, ridiculously simple to implement. It appears to use 
>> static
>> typing, so fast interpreters and simple compilers are easily possible.
>>
>> But it seems to have got a bad reputation,
>>
> That was the real reason it became so popular. When I wrote my book on 
> script interpreters, obviously I chose Basic as the example language, 
> because the interpreter weighs in at around 1000 lines of C, including 
> comments.

It must have been changed at some point; when I downloaded it a few years 
ago, it was about 3000 lines of C. Still smallish, although I don't know how 
comprehensive a version it is.

-- 
Bartc 

On Jul 13, 1:10=A0pm, "BartC" <b...@freeuk.com> wrote:
> <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:d07dacdf-3c7a-4b2f-af36-17a6212d181e@googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 7:53:14 PM UTC+1, Bart wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, June 20, 2012 11:59:06 AM UTC-7, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote=
:
>
> > <snip>
>
> >> >> There
> >> >> is the famous saying Dijkstra made about Basic (a popular language)=
:
> >> >> "It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students
> >> >> that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers
> >> >> they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration."
>
> > he didn't like COBOL either
>
> He also said: "Object-oriented programming is an exceptionally bad idea
> which could only have originated in California.". Although this time I
> agree!
>
>
>
>
>
> >> (So anyone who's ever had to write a set of step-by-step instructions,
> >> which is what Basic mostly was, can never be a (good) programmer?)
>
> > BASIC (I'm talking Dartmouth-like BASIC with LET and line numbers and
> > GOTO, not the quasi-structured Basics that later appeared) doesn't scal=
e
> > well. People hack around (or used to) and then think they can program.
> > Then you give em something hard (or at least large) and it it all falls=
 to
> > pieces. Dijkstra is, of course, wrong. he's indulging in hyperbole to m=
ake
> > a point. People can become good (or even great) programs despite early
> > exposure to BASIC.
>
> > BASIC has no:-
> > =A0 - control structures (IF, GOTO)
> > =A0 - decent data structures (DIM)
> > =A0 - recursion
> > =A0 - local data?
>
> > It uses line numbers. Things like BBC Basic (still pretty nasty) had
> > powerful string handling which is nice.
>
> I'm not aware of any Basic that doesn't have IF, GOTO and DIM; those are =
the
> fundamentals (with LET, INPUT and PRINT) otherwise you won't be able to
> program much.

a terrible bit of phrasing on my part! They should have read something
like:-

- control structures (IF, GOTO)
=3D>
- no proper control structures (except IF and GOTO)

> The thing about Basic, is that it has exactly those constructs that you
> might employ, to describe some set of instructions or algorithm to a
> non-programmer. So they are 'natural'. I've even seen them on my tax retu=
rn:
> 'if this doesn't apply, then go to section N'!
>
> But you are right in that in doesn't scale well without some structured
> programming features.

On Wednesday, July 11, 2012 11:53:14 AM UTC-7, Bart wrote:
(snipped)
>=20
> It sounds just a bad implementation. How long did C take on the same
> machine? Did it use the same algorithm? Suppose it was C that was taking =
14
> hours, and Basic that was faster; would you still prefer to program in C?
>=20
> --=20
> Bartc

Actually learning C via SAS/C 6.0 on the Amiga 500 was a pain because my sy=
stem was floppy disk based, and swapping floppies was error prone. So I lea=
rned C on my first PC a 486DX50 in MSDOS - via Turbo C++ 3.0 for DOS, in wh=
ich that system had a hard drive.=20

The same algorithm in C was shorter and faster. It was AmigaBASIC (Microsof=
t licensed to Commodore) that was really slow. Actually that's not right - =
I am comparing a 8 Mhz Amiga 500 to my 50Mhz PC - so that's the only differ=
ence I see.