|
The single biggest difference are the libraries / frameworks that ship with them.
And frankly, learning frameworks is a terrible way to learn a language.
Citizen 20.1.01 'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'
|
|
|
|
|
Shog9 wrote: And frankly, learning frameworks is a terrible way to learn a language.
Quite. You meet these people in the field all the time. But you could also say that of IDEs. Its pretty hard to move to a different IDE once you get used to one (even with whatever crap you might have to endure).
"Every time Lotus Notes starts up, somewhere a puppy, a kitten, a lamb, and a baby seal are killed. Lotus Notes is a conspiracy by the forces of Satan to drive us over the brink into madness. The CRC-32 for each file in the installation includes the numbers 666." Gary Wheeler
"The secret to a long and healthy life is simple. Don't get ill and don't die." Pete O'Hanlon, courtesy of Rama
"I realised that all of my best anecdotes started with "So there we were, pissed". Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
Despite the fact I am primarily a VB.NET programmer (and C#, if I have to (I just prefer the VB syntax, ok?)) the first language I learnt was ASM, but the first one I understood was Command Line C++, which seems to have been a good start.
I also have a design pattern book which is written in java...I didn't realize until over halfway though, I thought it was written in C#!
Besides, in the end, surely the framework/platform is the important decision, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
Andy Davies wrote: Besides, in the end, surely the framework/platform is the important decision, isn't it?
Not for learning programming concepts. I'd say it may even be harmful, giving a kid a treasure chest like a framework and not first teaching them the basics. I know I did some hideous things with the .NET Framework when it first came out.
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote: At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you can't communicate your ideas clearly, succinctly, and concretely, you won't be able to code them.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Right... but all things being equal... answer the damned poll... 
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote: At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Watson wrote: Right... but all things being equal... answer the damned poll...
Pilot and Logo weren't options to choose from. That's where I'd start. With basic programming concepts, not all this overrated object oriented crap.
Actually, my son is learning development with Interacx. Which means he's learning about database normalization and high level operations for managing data (binding, transactions, and events).
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
... definitely C as most languages such as C++, C#, and PHP stem from it. :P
The worst thing about the darkness is the light at the end - DX-MON
|
|
|
|
|
By that logic we (meaning everyone using English on this site) should all have started with Germanic.
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote: At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
About that.  but before you learn gemanic you'd need to learn runic (furthark for another name)
The worst thing about the darkness is the light at the end - DX-MON
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, so learning the origin might not be the best idea eh
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote: At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, it's like learning music by playing the piano. If you learn the piano first, all other instruments are easier to learn. Same goes for C, if you can use it, all other languages are easier.
|
|
|
|
|
The best way to understand something is the C/C++.
The best way to begin writing code is C#.
The better way to write bug is VB.
Dr.Luiji
Trust and you'll be trusted.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't worry, i fixed it for you :p :
The best way to understand something is the C/C++.
The best way to begin writing code is C# or VB.NET.
The better way to write bug is VB.
|
|
|
|
|
 good answer XD
Greets
PS: I'm still laughing ^^
You often cannot figure out what computers do... But don't forget that they only do what they were told to do 
|
|
|
|
|
- Ruby (not sure why anyone would wanna use this)
- JavaScript (no tools needed)
- Scheme (taught in plenty universities)
[update] forgot these
- Ocaml
- Haskell
- Pascal
[update]
modified on Monday, April 7, 2008 9:33 AM
|
|
|
|
|
leppie wrote: - Ruby (not sure why anyone would wanna use this)
I use it everyday, good language, gets the job done.
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote: At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Watson wrote: I use it everyday, good language, gets the job done.
But how many others simply cannot use it? How many users does actually know that Ruby support continuations, and know how to use them? From what I have seen, and this is purely based on the 'Rails' concept, Ruby is very much like a tricycle with training wheels.
Although big, the Ruby community does not seem very 'stable'.
|
|
|
|
|
leppie wrote: But how many others simply cannot use it?
Cannot? Nobody is prevented from using Ruby. It works on various platforms, much like other languages. It is even gaining support in the .NET Framework.
leppie wrote: How many users does actually know that Ruby support continuations, and know how to use them?
Those that do, do and those that don't, don't. Much like other languages with certain features.
leppie wrote: From what I have seen, and this is purely based on the 'Rails' concept, Ruby is very much like a tricycle with training wheels.
I have no idea what that means? Tricycle with training wheels?
leppie wrote: Although big, the Ruby community does not seem very 'stable'.
What is unstable about it? I have been using it for 3 years now and had no "stability" problems.
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote: At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Watson wrote: I have no idea what that means? Tricycle with training wheels?
I meant it as 'very guiding' like someone holding your hand throughout.
Paul Watson wrote: What is unstable about it? I have been using it for 3 years now and had no "stability" problems.
I am sure the language is stable (and indeed very usable), I was rather referring to the user community. It always seems like there is drama
I have nothing per se against Ruby, but it seems the way it's being used and promoted it will turn into the modern day VB, albeit with a bit more style.
|
|
|
|
|
leppie wrote: It always seems like there is drama
If you mean that one rant by that one chap then... *shrug* it has nothing to do with the language and none of the Ruby user community I interact with was affected. I've seen plenty of "drama" in the C#, C++ (all that "standards" talk sure gets heated) and Java communities. Doesn't seem to stop people getting work done.
leppie wrote: I meant it as 'very guiding' like someone holding your hand throughout.
It is a high level "scripting" language. For a lot of programming you don't need a language that has a gun pointing at your foot.
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote: At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
leppie wrote: Scheme
There is "Lisp".
|
|
|
|
|
Scheme and Lisp is quite far apart, well since 1976. Normally Lisp would be associated with Common Lisp. The differences in variable scoping make them more different than say Java vs C#.
|
|
|
|
|
Can't say I am an expert for Lisp, but most texts agree that CL and Scheme are the two major dialects of Lisp. See here[^], for instance.
leppie wrote: more different than say Java vs C#.
That doesn't say much Java and C# are really the same thing.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
