teaching OO

[Gabriel Zachmann]

Thanks a lot for your response and sharing your thoughts.

>    I think it's 
>  clear the future of programming won't look like C++.  It won't 

You know, I keep wondering exactly what we will be teaching as programming
languages become easier and easier to learn.

Programming itself? -- won't be enough for a whole semester.
Algorithms? -- is and will be a whole different class.
Patterns? -- needs too large programming assignments.
...


>  vs. by-value calling, etc) as coping mechanisms.  This is because I come 
>  at it from the perspective of a dynamic language programmer (before 
>  Python I preferred languages like Scheme or Smalltalk).  These 
>  judgements are something a programmer acquires early on.  Conversely, if 
>  you start with C++ or C, you might see a dynamic language as a facade 
>  ontop of the more fundamental notions of pointers and memory management. 

I learnt OO the smalltalk way, and i loved it.
But i program a lot in C++ and i do like it, too.

Another question is: can you teach effectively the inner workings, if you
teach only a dynamic language?


Best regards,
Gabriel.

-- 
/-------------------------------------------------------------------------\
| There are works which wait,                                             |
| and which one does not understand for a long time; [...]                |
| for the question often arrives a terribly long time after the answer.   |
|                                                         (Oscar Wilde)   |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| zach at cs.uni-bonn.de            __@/'        www.gabrielzachmann.org     |
\-------------------------------------------------------------------------/