Feedback wanted on programming introduction (Python in Windows)

[Olof Bjarnason]

2009/10/28 Alf P. Steinbach <alfps at start.no>

> * 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. :-)
>>
>
>
I'd like to make the statement that I think the opposite is true - a novice
book has higher quality to a novice if the author himself learnt the
language/programming while writing the book. The author will then have a
much better chance at catching the "hard to understand" concepts a novice is
confronted with, instead of trying to shine with his technical skills in the
language/programming.

IMHO :-)


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
>
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>



-- 
twitter.com/olofb
olofb.wordpress.com
olofb.wordpress.com/tag/english
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/attachments/20091028/62c4dcdd/attachment-0001.html>