Feedback wanted on programming introduction (Python in Windows)
Alf P. Steinbach
alfps at start.no
Wed Oct 28 04:58:43 EDT 2009
* tm:
> On 28 Okt., 07:52, "Alf P. Steinbach" <al... at start.no> wrote:
>> [Cross-posted comp.programming and comp.lang.python]
>
> Looking at your topic '(Python in Windows)', without taking a
> glimpse at your actual introduction, I have the following to say:
> I think it is not a good idea to teach programming with a focus
> on a specific operating system. Programming should IMHO be taught
> without reference to an operating system. Otherwise you just teach
> how to write unportable programs.
I think you're trolling a little. :-)
Without reference to an OS you can't address any of the issues that a beginner
has to grapple with, including most importantly tool usage, without which it's
not even possible to get started, but also, very importantly, a file system.
Learning programming without tools and without using files (or only using the
common denominator for file systems in OSes X, Y and Z) is sort of vacuous...
In addition there's the motivational factor.
Doing only academic examples, utilizing only a language's more or less portable
functionality, is very de-motivational, while the opposite is motivational.
>> Hi.
>>
>> I may finally have found the perfect language for a practically oriented
>> introductory book on programming, namely Python.
>
> What is considered 'perfect' depends on the point of view. Languages
> have assets and drawbacks and I don't even use the term 'perfect'
> for my own language. :-) There is always room to improve. Some of
> the features I consider important are discussed here:
>
> http://seed7.sourceforge.net/faq.htm
>
>> C++ was way too complex for the novice, JScript and C# suffered from too
>> fast-changing specifications and runtime environment, Java, well, nothing
>> particularly wrong but it's sort of too large and unwieldy and inefficient.
>
> While many people consider Java inefficient they do so in comparison
> to C/C++. I doubt that Java is inefficient compared to most
> interpreted languages.
>
>> I don't know whether this will ever become an actual book. I hope so!
>>
>> But since I don't know much Python -- I'm *learning* Python as I write
>
> Normally I prefer books written by people who already know the
> stuff they are writing about. I would consider that it is not a good
> selling argument when a book was written to *learn* a language. :-)
Yes, it would be silly to write a book or whatever about Python. This text is
primarily about programming, at the novice level, not about the Python language.
The programming language is only a vehicle.
However, as a vehicle the language needs to be suited for transport of the
novice. :-)
And it seems that Python is very well suited for that.
> Seed7 Homepage: http://seed7.sourceforge.net
I'm not familiar with Seed, sorry.
Cheers, & thanks for your thoughts,
- Alf
More information about the Python-list
mailing list