Related
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
Before you condemn this as subjective, consider that there are differences between different frameworks. Writing something with PHP, I assume, is probably a lot less verbose and thus time consuming and expensive than writing it in binary. While the differences may not be as pronounced between the title options, I think there probably are significant differences which can result in, for example, a DoodleJump-type app taking more or less time to code in each.
Although there are other factors involved in choosing a framework, I'm just asking which one requires the least amount of coding and thus time and expense for equally skilled developers to accomplish the same thing (conjuring DoodleJump physics, a basic TicTacToe game, creating a UI, whatever). I'd appreciate links to sources if you have them, as well as direct experience comparing the verbosity of one or more in accomplishing the same task.
I'd most like to get an idea of how Flash and HTML5 compare to Corona (in terms of development time), but I'm also curious about the others.
Well you should seriously rephrase the question. It looks like subjective.
I'll just give my experience with all these tools.
Disclaimer:- The following review is my own personal opinion and involves my personal experience. You might have different opinion.
Marmalade
While I've used marmalade for most of my deployed projects, I've never used their RAD tool quick for any serious development. I was asked to try it out by remaking one of our deployed game. I was really impressed with it's quickness and less-verbosity. Although it was only for 2D and I recommended it's use over normal marmalade for all our 2D games. Unfortunately, we never made any 2D games after that. The benefit was that it comes preloaded with box2D and Cocos-2Dx and still supports C++ libraries. Didn't try EDK with it yet, but it should support that too. The con (for me) was I had to learn luascript for that.
Flash
Well I am not a flash expert here, but I tried it on two of our deployed game and it was a good one. Although it was too limited in what it seemed to have. We had to Re-code one of these games in marmlade, just to support some 3D elements, which were not possible to do in flash(at least for me). Flash was too verbose and too confusing for me, since we don't know where the actual script is attached. I guess it must have happened with all programmers who tried flash after trying any other tool, like marmalade. It just confuse you.
Unity
Well it was much much better than Flash, and is actually a well written game engine. Although it might cost a fortune for Indie developers, but still it's worth it. I've been using it for almost 4-5 months and I already started liking it over any other engine. It's easy to learn and too less verbose. You just need to drag and drop and attach the script to the gameobjects.(Not really that simple actually). No need to worry about Physics engine, no worries about plugins(since most of the plugins are already avaialable). And you can do 3D in that too.
Never tried Corona and HTML5 for any development project, so can't have a say in that.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
Locked. This question and its answers are locked because the question is off-topic but has historical significance. It is not currently accepting new answers or interactions.
When all you have is a pair of bolt cutters and a bottle of vodka, everything looks like the lock on the door of Wolf Blitzer's boathouse. (Replace that with a hammer and a nail if you don't read xkcd)
I currently program Clojure, Python, Java and PHP, so I am familiar with the C and LISP syntax as well as the whitespace thing. I know imperative, functional, immutable, OOP and a couple type systems and other things. Now I want more!
What are languages that take a different approach and would be useful for either practical tool choosing or theoretical understanding?
I don't feel like learning another functional language(Haskell) or another imperative OOP language(Ruby), nor do I want to practice impractical fun languages like Brainfuck.
One very interesting thing I found myself are monoiconic stack based languages like Factor.
Only when I feel I understand most concepts and have answers to all my questions, I want to start thinking about my own toy language to contain all my personal preferences.
Matters of practicality are highly subjective, so I will simply say that learning different language paradigms will only serve to make you a better programmer. What is more practical than that?
Functional, Haskell - I know you said that you didn't want to, but you should really really reconsider. You've gotten some functional exposure with Clojure and even Python, but you've not experienced it to its fullest without Haskell. If you're really against Haskell then good compromises are either ML or OCaml.
Declarative, Datalog - Many people would recommend Prolog in this slot, but I think Datalog is a cleaner example of a declarative language.
Array, J - I've only just discovered J, but I find it to be a stunning language. It will twist your mind into a pretzel. You will thank J for that.
Stack, Factor/Forth - Factor is very powerful and I plan to dig into it ASAP. Forth is the grand-daddy of the Stack languages, and as an added bonus it's simple to implement yourself. There is something to be said about learning through implementation.
Dataflow, Oz - I think the influence of Oz is on the upswing and will only continue to grow in the future.
Prototype-based, JavaScript / Io / Self - Self is the grand-daddy and highly influential on every prototype-based language. This is not the same as class-based OOP and shouldn't be treated as such. Many people come to a prototype language and create an ad-hoc class system, but if your goal is to expand your mind, then I think that is a mistake. Use the language to its full capacity. Read Organizing Programs without Classes for ideas.
Expert System, CLIPS - I always recommend this. If you know Prolog then you will likely have the upper-hand in getting up to speed, but it's a very different language.
Frink - Frink is a general purpose language, but it's famous for its system of unit conversions. I find this language to be very inspiring in its unrelenting drive to be the best at what it does. Plus... it's really fun!
Functional+Optional Types, Qi - You say you've experience with some type systems, but do you have experience with "skinnable* type systems? No one has... but they should. Qi is like Lisp in many ways, but its type system will blow your mind.
Actors+Fault-tolerance, Erlang - Erlang's process model gets a lot of the buzz, but its fault-tolerance and hot-code-swapping mechanisms are game-changing. You will not learn much about FP that you wouldn't learn with Clojure, but its FT features will make you wonder why more languages can't seem to get this right.
Enjoy!
What about Prolog (for unification/backtracking etc), Smalltalk (for "everything's a message"), Forth (reverse polish, threaded interpreters etc), Scheme (continuations)?
Not a language, but the Art of the Metaobject Protocol is mind-bending stuff
I second Haskell. Don't think "I know a Lisp, so I know functional programming". Ever heard of type classes? Algebraic data types? Monads? "Modern" (more or less - at least not 50 years old ;) ) functional languages, especially Haskell, have explored a plethora of very powerful useful new concepts. Type classes add ad-hoc polymorphism, but type inference (yet another thing the languages you already know don't have) works like a charm. Algebraic data types are simply awesome, especially for modelling trees-like data structures, but work fine for enums or simple records, too. And monads... well, let's just say people use them to make exceptions, I/O, parsers, list comprehensions and much more - in purely functional ways!
Also, the whole topic is deep enough to keep one busy for years ;)
I currently program Clojure, Python, Java and PHP [...] What are languages that take a different approach and would be useful for either practical tool choosing or theoretical understanding?
C
There's a lot of C code lying around---it's definitely practical. If you learn C++ too, there's a big lot of more code around (and the leap is short once you know C and Java).
It also gives you (or forces you to have) a great understanding of some theoretical issues; for instance, each running program lives in a 4 GB byte array, in some sense. Pointers in C are really just indices into this array---they're just a different kind of integer. No different in Java, Python, PHP, except hidden beneath a surface layer.
Also, you can write object-oriented code in C, you just have to be a bit manual about vtables and such. Simon Tatham's Portable Puzzle Collection is a great example of fairly accessible object-oriented C code; it's also fairly well designed and well worth a read to a beginner/intermediate C programmer. This is what happens in Haskell too---type classes are in some sense "just another vtable".
Another great thing about C: engaging in Q&A with skilled C programmers will get you a lot of answers that explain C in terms of lower-level constructs, which builds your closer-to-the-iron knowledge base.
I may be missing OP's point---I think I am, judging by the other answers---but I think it might be a useful answer to other people who have a similar question and read this thread.
From Peter Norvig's site:
"Learn at least a half dozen programming languages. Include one language that supports class abstractions (like Java or C++), one that supports functional abstraction (like Lisp or ML), one that supports syntactic abstraction (like Lisp), one that supports declarative specifications (like Prolog or C++ templates), one that supports coroutines (like Icon or Scheme), and one that supports parallelism (like Sisal). "
http://norvig.com/21-days.html
I'm amazed that after 6 months and hundreds of votes, noone has mentioned SQL ...
In the types as theorems / advanced type systems: Coq ( I think Agda comes in this category too).
Coq is a proof assistant embedded into a functional programing language.
You can write mathematical proofs and Coq helps to build a solution.
You can write functions and prove properties about it.
It has dependent types, that alone blew my mind. A simple example:
concatenate: forall (A:Set)(n m:nat), (array A m)->(array A n)->(array A (n+m))
is the signature of a function that concatenates two arrays of size n and m of elements of A and returns an array of size (n+m). It won't compile if the function doesn't return that!
Is based on the calculus of inductive constructions, and it has a solid theory behind it.
I'm not smart enough to understand it all, but I think is worth taking a look, specially if you trend towards type theory.
EDIT: I need to mention: you write a function in Coq and then you can PROVE it is correct for any input, that is amazing!
One of the languages which i am interested for have a very different point of view (including a new vocabulary to define the language elements and a radical diff syntax) is J. Haskell would be the obvious choice for me, although it is a functional lang, cause its type system and other unique features open your mind and makes you rethink you previous knowledge in (functional) programming.
Just like fogus has suggested it to you in his list, I advise you too to look at the language OzML/Mozart
Many paradigms, mainly targetted at concurrency/multi agent programming.
Concerning concurrency, and distributed calculus, the equivalent of Lambda calculus (which is behind functionnal programming) is called the Pi Calculus.
I have only started begining to look at some implementation of the Pi calculus. But they already have enlarged my conceptions of computing.
Pict
Nomadic Pict
FunLoft. (this one is pretty recent, conceived at INRIA)
Dataflow programming, aka flow-based programming is a good step ahead on the road. Some buzzwords: paralell processing, rapid prototyping, visual programming (not as bad as sounds first).
Wikipedia's articles are good:
In computer science, flow-based
programming (FBP) is a programming
paradigm that defines applications as
networks of "black box" processes,
which exchange data across predefined
connections by message passing, where
the connections are specified
externally to the processes. These
black box processes can be reconnected
endlessly to form different
applications without having to be
changed internally. FBP is thus
naturally component-oriented.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow-based_programming
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dataflow_programming
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor_model
Read JPM's book: http://jpaulmorrison.com/fbp/
(We've written a simple implementation in C++ for home automation purposes, and we're very happy with it. Documentation is under construction.)
You've learned a lot of languages. Now is the time to focus on one language, and master it.
perhaps you might want to try LabView for it's visual programming, although it's for engineering purposes.
nevertheless, you seem pretty interested in all that's out there, hence the suggestion
also, you could try the android appinventor for visually building stuff
Bruce A. Tate, taking a page from The Pragmatic Programmer wrote a book on exactly that:
Seven Languages in Seven Weeks: A Pragmatic Guide to Learning Programming Languages
In the book, he covers Clojure, Haskell, Io, Prolog, Scala, Erlang, and Ruby.
Mercury: http://www.mercury.csse.unimelb.edu.au/
It's a typed Prolog, with uniqueness types and modes (i.e. specifying that the predicate append(X,Y,Z) meaning X appended to Y is Z yields one Z given an X and Y, but can yield multiple X/Ys for a given Z). Also, no cut or other extra-logical predicates.
If you will, it's to Prolog as Haskell is to Lisp.
Programming does not cover the task of programmers.
New things are always interesting, but there are some very cool old stuff.
The first database system was dBaseIII for me, I was spending about a month to write small examples (dBase/FoxPro/Clipper is a table-based db with indexes). Then, at my first workplace, I met MUMPS, and I got headache. I was young and fresh-brained, but it took 2 weeks to understand the MUMPS database model. There was a moment, like in comics: after 2 weeks, a button has been switched on, and the bulb has just lighten up in my mind. MUMPS is natural, low level, and very-very fast. (It's an unbalanced, unformalized btree without types.) Today's trends shows the way back to it: NoSQL, key-value db, multidimensional db - so there are only some steps left, and we reach Mumps.
Here's a presentation about MUMPS's advantages: http://www.slideshare.net/george.james/mumps-the-internet-scale-database-presentation
A short doc on hierarchical db: http://www.cs.pitt.edu/~chang/156/14hier.html
An introduction to MUMPS globals (in MUMPS, local variables, short: locals are the memory variables, and the global variables, short: globals are the "db variables", setting a global variable goes to the disk immediatelly):
http://gradvs1.mgateway.com/download/extreme1.pdf (PDF)
Say you want to write a love poem...
Instead of using a hammer just because there's one already in your hand, learn the proper tools for the task: learn to speak French.
Once you've reached near-native speaking level, you're ready to start your poem.
While learning new languages on an academical level is an interesting hobby, IMHO you can't really learn to use one until you try to apply it to a real world problem. So, rather than looking for a new language to learn, I'd in your place first look for a new things to build, and only then I'd look for the right language to use for that one specific project. First pick the problem, then the tool, not the other way around..
For anyone who hasn't been around since the mid 80's, I'd suggest learning 8-bit BASIC. It's very low-level, very primitive and it's an interesting exercise to program around its holes.
On the same line, I'd pick an HP-41C series calculator (or emulator, although nothing beats real hardware). It's hard to wrap your brain around it, but well worth it. A TI-57 will do, but will be a completely different experience. If you manage to solve second degree equations on a TI-55, you'll be considered a master (it had no conditionals and no branches except a RST, that jumped the program back to step 0).
And last, I'd pick FORTH (it was mentioned before). It has a nice "build your language" Lisp-ish thing, but is much more bare metal. It will teach you why Rails is interesting and when DSLs make sense and you'll have a glipse on what your non-RPN calculator is thinking while you type.
PostScript. It is a rather interesting language as it's stack based, and it's quite practical once you want to put things on paper and you want either to get it done or troubleshoot why isn't it getting done.
Erlang. The intrinsic parallelism gives it a rather unusual feel and you can again learn useful things from that. I'm not so sure about practicality, but it can be useful for some fast prototyping tasks and highly redundant systems.
Try programming GPUs - either CUDA or OpenCL. It's just C/C++ extensions, but the mental model of the architecture is again completely different from the classic approach, and it definitely gets practical once you need to get some real number crunching done.
Erlang, Forth and some embedded work with assembly language. Really; buy an Arduino kit or something similar, and create a polyphonic beep in assembly. You'll really learn something.
There's also anic:
https://code.google.com/p/anic/
From its site:
Faster than C, Safer than Java, Simpler than *sh
anic is the reference implementation compiler for the experimental, high-performance, implicitly parallel, deadlock-free general-purpose dataflow programming language ANI.
It doesn't seem to be under active development anymore, but it seems to have some interesting concepts (and that, after all, is what you seem to be after).
While not meeting your requirement of "different" - I'd wager that Fantom is a language that a professional programmer should look at. By their own admission, the authors of fantom call it a boring language. It merely shores up the most common use cases of Java and C#, with some borrowed closure syntax from ruby and similar newer languages.
And yet it manages to have its own bootstrapped compiler, provide a platform that has a drop in install with no external dependencies, gets packages right - and works on Java, C# and now the Web (via js).
It may not widen your horizons in terms of new ways of programming, but it will certainly show you better ways of programming.
One thing that I see missing from the other answers: languages based on term-rewriting.
You could take a look at Pure - http://code.google.com/p/pure-lang/ .
Mathematica is also rewriting based, although it's not so easy to figure out what's going on, as it's rather closed.
APL, Forth and Assembly.
Have some fun. Pick up a Lego Mindstorm robot kit and CMU's RobotC and write some robotics code. Things happen when you write code that has to "get dirty" and interact with the real world that you cannot possibly learn in any other way. Yes, same language, but a very different perspective.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I have an interesting idea for a new programming language. It's based on a new programming paradigm that I've been working out in my head for some time. I finally got around to start working on a basic parser and interpreter for it a few weeks ago.
I want my new language to be successful and I want to eventually create a community around it when it's ready to release. The idea behind it is fairly innovative, so I don't expect it to gain a lot of ground in the business world, but it would thrill me more than anything else to see a handful of start ups use or open source projects use it.
So taking those aims into account, what can I do to help make my language successful? What do language projects do to become successful? What should I avoid at all costs? I'd love to hear opinions or stories about other languages -- successful or not -- so I can think about them as I continue to develop.
So far, the two biggest concerns on my mind are finding a market, access to existing libraries, having amazing tool support. What else might I add to this list?
The true answer is by having a beard.
http://blogs.microsoft.co.il/blogs/tamir/archive/2008/04/28/computer-languages-and-facial-hair-take-two.aspx
Although not specific to new programming languages, the book Producing Open Source Software by Karl Fogel (available to read online) may be contain some hints to the issue of making a community around your new programming language.
In terms of adoption of programming languages in general, it seems like the trend lately has been to have a rich library to make development times shorter.
As there isn't much detail on what your language is like, it's hard to determine whether adoption of the language is going to depend on the availability of a rich library. Perhaps your language will be able to fill a niche that has been overlooked by other languages and be able to gain users. Or perhaps it has a slick name that will draw people in -- there are many factors which can affect the adoption of a language.
Here are some factors that come to mind when thinking about recent successful languages:
Ability to leverage existing libraries in the new language.
Having an adapter to external libraries written in other languages.
Python allows access to code written in C through the Python/C API.
Targeting a platform which already has plenty of libraries available for use.
Groovy and Scala target the Java platform, therefore allowing the use of and interoperation between existing Java code.
Language design and syntax to allow increased productivity.
Many dynamically-typed languages have gained popularity, such as Ruby and Python to name a couple.
More concise and clear code can be written in languages such as Groovy, as opposed to verbose languages such as Java.
Offering features such as functions as first-class objects and closures which aren't offered in more "traditional" languages such as C and Java.
A community of dedicated users who also are willing to teach newcomers on the benefits of a language
The human factor is going to be big in wide-spread support for a language -- if people never start using your language, it won't gain more users.
Also, another suggestion that I could add is to make the development of your language open -- keep your users posted on developments in your language, and allow people to give you feedback. Better yet, let your users take part in the decision-making process, if you feel that is appropriate.
I believe that by offering ways to participate in the bringing up of a language, the more people will feel that they have a stake in the success of the new language, so the more likely it will gain more support.
Good luck!
Most languages that end up taking off rapidly do so by means of a killer app. For C it was Unix. Ruby had Rails. JavaScript is the only available programming system common to most browsers without third-party add-ons.
Another means of success is by fiat. This only works if you have significant clout. For example C#, as nice as a language as it might be, wouldn't be any where near as popular as it is now if Microsoft had not pushed it as hard as it does. Objective-C is the language of MacOS X simply because Apple says so.
The vast majority of languages, though, which lack a single killer app or a major corporate backer have gained success through long term investment of their respective creators. Perl and Python are prime examples. C++ has no single entity behind it, but it has evolved as the needs of developers have changed.
Don't worry about trying to make the language be successful; worry about using it to solve real problems and make real money.
You'll either make lots of money from using this language, or not. Once you have lots of money, others may care how you did it. Or not, either way you have lots of money.
If you don't make lots of money, nobody will want to know how you did it.
Edit based on comment: I define successful as people using it, and people use languages to solve problems, most for profit, thus successful == profitable.
In addition to making the language easy to use (which has several meanings), you should develop a comprehensive library that covers and also provides a good level of abstraction over (the following most important areas):
* Data structures and manipulation
* File I/O support
* XML processing
* Networking (plus web based technologies like HTTP/HTTPS)
* Database support
* Synchronous and asynchronous I/O
* Processes and threads
* Math
A well thought out framework that makes rapid development faster (and easier to maintain) would be a great addition. For this, you should know the currently popular frameworks well.
Keep in mind that it takes a lot of time. I think it took python about 10 years (someone please correct me if I'm wrong).
So even if your community still seems small after say, 5 years, that's not the end of the story.
"It's based on a new programming paradigm that I've been working out in my head for some time."
While laudable, odds are really good that someone has already done something with your "new" paradigm.
To make a language usable, it must build on prior art. Totally new is not a good path to success. My favorite example is Algol 68.
Algol 60 was wildly popular (back in the day, which is a while ago, admittedly).
The experts wanted to build on this success. They proposed some new paradigms, the effort split into factions. The purists put the new paradigms into Algol 68; it disappeared into obscurity. Some folks created a different version of Algol, called PL/I. It did not have any really new paradigms. It actually went somewhere and was used heavily. Another group created Pascal -- it didn't have much that was new -- it discarded things from Algol 60. It actually went somewhere ans was used heavily.
Your new paradigm must have a clear and concise summary so people can fit it into a context of where the language is usable, how it can be used, what the costs and benefits of using it are.
A "new programming paradigm" causes some people to say "why learn a completely new paradigm when the ones I have work so nicely?" You have to be very clear on how it helps to have a new paradigm.
The language and libraries must work, and work very, very well. A language that isn't rock-solid is worthless. In order to be rock-solid it must be very simple.
It has to have a tutorial that will help anyone get started with your language.
Good Framework for Common Tasks
Easy Installation/Deployment
Good Documentation
Debugger/IDE and other Tools
A popular flagship product that uses your language!
Good documentation, including a detailed reference manual as well as simple examples to get people started quickly.
Good library support so that people can actually write useful programs.
Most popular languages seem to be very strong in either or both or both of those.
Use Trojan Horse approach
C++ - The Forgotten Trojan Horse
An interesting article on why C++ can grab the heart of programmers successfully.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
I am a student studying software development, and I feel programming, in general, is too broad of a subject to try to know everything. To be proficient, you have to decide which areas to focus your learning and understanding. Certain skill sets synergize with each other, like data-driven web development and SQL experience. However, all the win32 API experience in the world may not directly apply to linux development. This leads me to believe, as a beginning programmer, I should start deciding where I want to specialize after I have general understanding of the basic principles of software development.
This is a multi-part question really:
What are the common specializations within computer programming and software development?
Which of these specializations have more long-term value, both as a foundation for other specializations and/or as marketable skills?
Which skill sets complement each other?
Are there any areas of specialization that hinder your ability of developing other areas of specialization.
Ben, Almost all seasoned programmers are still students in programming. You never stops learning anything when you are a developer. But if you are really starting off on your career then you should be least worried about the specialization thing. All APIs, frameworks and skills that you expect that gives you a long term existence in the field is not going to happen. Technology seems changing a lot and you should be versatile and flexible enough to learn anything. The knowledge you acquire on one platform/api/framework doesn't die off. You can apply the skills to the next greatest platform/api/framework.
That being said you should just stop worrying about the future and concentrate on the basics. DataStructures, Algorithm Analysis and Design, Compiler Design, Operating system design are the bare minimum stuff you need. And further you should be willing to go back and read tho books in those field any time in your career. Thats all is required. Good luck.
Sorry if I sounded like a big ass advisor; but thats what I think. :-)
Not to directly reject your premise but I actually think being a generalist is a good position in programming. You will certainly develop expertise in specific areas but it is likely to be a product of either personal interest or work necessity. Over time the stuff you are able to transfer across languages and problem domains is at the heart of what makes good programmers.
I think the more important question is: What areas of specialization are you most interested in?
Once you know, begin learning in that area!
I would think the greatest skill of all would be to adapt with the times, because if your employer can see this potential in you then they would be wise to hold on tightly.
That said, I would advise you dive into the area YOU would enjoy. Learning is driven by enthusiasm.
Since my current employ is with an internet provider, I've found networking knowledge particularly helpful. But someday I'd like to play with 3D graphics (not necessarily games).
Go as deep as you can starting off in one environment, win32, .net, Java, Objective C... whatever.
It is important to build the deep understanding of how X works... so that you can translate the same concepts into other languages or platforms/environments, if you so desire.
"Are there any areas of specialization that hinder your ability of developing other areas of specialization." Sort of, but nothing permanent i think.
Since I am relatively green myself (less than 4 years) I come from a really OOP mindset. I've rarely jumped out of .NET, so I had a hard time on one job when coming into contact with embedded code. With embedded programmers fearing object creation and the performance loss of inheritance. I had to learn the environment, seriously low memory and slow clock times, they were coming from. Those are times to grow, I had a better time at it because i understood my area pretty well.
I will say if you pick something to specialize in for marketability and money, you will probably burn out fast. If you do start to specialize pick something you enjoy. I love GUI programing and hate server side stuff, my buddy is the opposite, but we both love our jobs. If he had to do my job, and I his, we would both go insane out of boredom.
As a student I'd recommend forgetting about what you're programming and focusing on the software process itself. Understand how to analyse a problem and ask the right questions; learn every design pattern you can and actually apply them all to gain a real understanding and appreciation of object-oriented design; write tests and then code only as much as you need to in order to make the tests pass. I think the best way to really learn is to just code as much as you can - the language and the domain aren't important, browse sourceforge and freshmeat for any interesting-sounding projects and get involved. What's important is understanding the fundamentals of software engineering.
And yes, this includes C. Or Assembler. This is the easiest way to get a good understanding of how your computer works and what your high-level code is actually doing.
Finally, never stop learning - Service-oriented architecture, inversion of control, domain-specific languages, business process management are all showing huge benefits so they're important to be aware of - But by the time you finish studying and join the workforce who knows what the next big thing will be?
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
Locked. This question and its answers are locked because the question is off-topic but has historical significance. It is not currently accepting new answers or interactions.
What languages and tools do you consider a youngster starting out in programming should use in the modern era?
Lots of us started with proprietary Basics and they didn't do all of us long term harm :) but given the experiences you have had since then and your knowledge of the domain now are there better options?
There are related queries to this one such as "Best ways to teach a beginner to program?" and "One piece of advice" about starting adults programming both of which I submitted answers to but children might require a different tool.
Disclosure: it's bloody hard choosing a 'correct' answer to a question like this so who ever has the best score in a few days will get the 'best answer' mark from me based on the communities choice.
I would suggest LEGO Mindstorm, it provides an intuitive drag and drop interface for programming and because it comes with hardware it provides something tangible for a child to grasp. Also, because it is "LEGO" they might think of it as more of a game then a programming exercise.
My day job is in a school, and over the past few years I've seen or taught (or attempted to teach) various children, in various numbers, programming lessons.
Children are all different - some are quick learners, some aren't. In particular, some have better literacy skills than others, and that definitely makes a difference to the speed at which they'll pick up programming. I bet that most of us here, as professional computer programmers and the kind of people who read and post to forums for fun, learnt to read at a pretty young age. For those kinds of children, and if it's your own child who you can teach one-on-one, you could do worse than JavaScript - it has the advantage that you can do real stuff with it right away, and the edit-test cycle is simply hitting "refresh" in the browser. It gets confusing when you start to run in to how JavaScript does everything asynchronously, and is tricky to debug, but for a bright child under close tuition these problems can be overcome.
LEGO Mindstorms is definitely up there at the top of the list. Most schools now super-glue the bricks together to create pre-made models that can't have bits nicked off of them, but this shouldn't be a problem at home. Over on the Times Educational Supplement site (website forum for the UK's weekly teaching newspaper), the "what programming language is best for children?" topic comes up pretty regularly. Lots of recommendations over there for Scratch as an alternative to Mindstorms - bit more freedom than Mindstorms, again probably better for the brighter student who could also be given a soldering iron.
I've found that slower pupils can still have problems with Mindstorms, even though the programming environment is "graphical" - there's still a lot going on on screen, and there's a fair bit to remember (this was an older version, mind - haven't tried the snazzy new one yet). In my experience, the best all-round introduction to programming is probably still LOGO - actually a considerably more powerful language than most people give it credit for. The original Mindstorms book by Seymour Papert (nothing to do with LEGO - they nicked the title of the book for their product), one of the originators of LOGO, is the canonical reference for teaching programming to children as a "thinking skill" and for the concept of Constructionism in learning.
We've had classes of 7 or 8 year-olds programming LOGO. Note that we aren't aiming to make them "software developers", that's a career path they can decide on at some point post-16. At a young age we're trying to get them to think of "computer programming" as just another tool - how to set out a problem to be solved by a computer, in the same way they might use a mind map to help them organise and remember stuff for an exam. No poor child should be sat down and drilled in the minutia and use of a particular language, they should be left to explore and figure stuff out as they like.
I'll second Geoff's suggestions of Phrogram (used to be KPL), and Alice.
My only other suggestion is Lego Mindstorms NXT. The NXT's programming language is drag-and-drop, is very easy to use, and can do some very complicated tasks once you learn it. Also young boys usually like seeing things move. :)
I've used Alice and NXTs with some young kids, and they've taken to it very well.
Two possibilities are:
Scratch - developed at MIT - http://scratch.mit.edu/
and
EToys from the One Laptop per Child fame - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Squeak
Full disclosure: I'm one of the guys who invented Kid's Programming Language, which is now http://www.Phrogram.com, which others have recommended here. Let me add some programmer-oriented info about it.
It's a code IDE, rather than drag-and-drop, or designer-based. This was intentional on our part - we wanted to make it easy and fun to do real text-based programming, particularly programming games and graphics. This is a fundamental difference between us and Alice and Scratch. Which you pick is a matter of the kid, their age and aptitudes, your goals. Using them serially with the same beginner might be a great way to go - if you do that, I would recommend Scratch, Alice, Phrogram as the order. Phrogram has worked best for 12 years and up, but I know dads with 6 year olds who have taught their kids with it, and I know 10 year olds who have taught themselves with it.
The language is as much like English as we could make it, and is as minimal as we could make it. The secret sauce is in the class-based object heirarchy, which is again as simple, intuitive and English-like as we could make it. The object heirarchy is optimized for games and graphics. 3D models are available, and 2D sprites. Absolute movement using screen coordinates is supported, or relative movement ala LOGO turtles - Forward(x), TurnLeft(y).
The IDE comes with over 100 examples, some language examples (loops), some learning examples (arrays), some fully-functional games and sims (Pong, Missile Command, Game of Life).
To give you a sense of how highly leveraged we made the language and the IDE: with 27 instructions you can fly a 3D spaceship model around a 3D skybox, using your keyboard. The same with a 2D sprite is 12 to 15 instructions.
We are working on a Blade-compatible release of Phrogram that will allow programs to run on the XBox 360. Yeah, the XBox, on your big TV. Nice motivator for getting a kid started? :)
Phrogram includes support for class-based programming, with methods and properties - but that's only encapsulation, not inheritance or polymorphism.
A tutorial and user guide is available,
My own ebook is available at Amazon and other places online, "Learn to Program with Phrogram!," and gets a beginner started by programming the classic Pong.
Phrogram Programming for the Absolute Beginner, by Jerry Lee Ford, Jr., is also available, as a paperback, at Amazon and elsewhere.
For a child, I would go with Alice. Any kid is going to like the drag-and-drop interaction that Alice uses better than trying to remember how to spell and punctuate any programming language. He/She will learn the basic programming structures (conditionals, loops, etc.) and will experience the fun of building an animated program they can show off to other family or friends.
A beginner CS class at the local community college actually uses Alice to teach programming in a language-independent way. It provides a good foundation for moving into programming in a particular language (or a few languages) down the road.
I recently saw a presentation about GreenFoot (a java based learning environment for children). It looked awesome. If I would have kids, I would give it a try
Link to the presentation
It is a very playful environment, where you could start with very basic methods. The kids learn thinking in an object oriented way (you cannot instantiate an animal, but you can instantiate a cat). And the better they get, the more of Java you can uncover for/with them.
I'd go with Scratch, some points regarding it.
It's a graphical programming language. It isn't text based (this might be
positive or negative). It does make it more intuitive and easy for kids (7 and
up).
It's actually highly object. The objects you write these graphical scripts have the code attached to them and can be reused and moved around.
Very Important: quick and impressive results. Kids need to get going fast and get results in order to get hooked.
I'd like to note that although many of us started programing at a young age in basic or logo and because programmer later in life doesn't mean those are good languages to start with. I think that kids today have much better options, like scratch or Alice.
Text based languages (python, ruby, basic, c# or even c) are dependent on external libraries and tools (editors, compilers) while something like Alice or scratch is all inclusive and will teach kids (not aimed at teens) programming concepts. Later they can move on and expand their learning.
Check out Phrogram (formerly KPL) and Alice
I'd say: give the kid a real C64, because that's how I got started. But, today... I'd say Ruby, but Ruby is a bit too chaotic. BASIC would be better in the long run. Processing is easy to learn, and it's basically Java.
The reason I recommend a C64 is because it's BASIC, but you still have to learn certain computer-related things, like the memory model, pixels, characters, character maps, newlines, etc. etc, if you want to do more advanced stuff. Also, if your kid finds it boring, you know his heart really isn't into coding.
I would pitch LOGO. It was something that was taught in my elementary school. It gives nearly immediate feedback, and will teach really basic programming concepts. Moving that little turtle around can be a lot of fun.
For a child, I would go with Alice.
Here is another vote for Alice. My 4 kids have had a ton of fun working with it and learning the basic concepts of programming. Of course to them it's all about socializing with fairies and ogres, but heck the darn legacy system I work on could use some faries and ogres too.
I'd recommend python, because it's so terse and expressive. Seems less likely to frustrate when getting started, but offers plenty of room to learn more advanced concepts as well.
Game Maker might be another approach. You can start simple with easy drag and drop development, and then introduce more advanced programming as you go. The book The Game Maker's Apprentice: Game Development for Beginners has a number of sample games and takes you through the steps required to make them.
I think python is a good alternative; it is a very powerful language also you can easily do a lot of things (not boring at all).
Checkout Squeak developed by Alan Kay who think programming should be taught at early ages.
How old? Lots of us stared with BASIC at some point, but before then, I learned the concepts of stringing commands together, variables, and looping with LOGO. Figuring out how to draw a circle with a triangle that can only go in a straight line and turn was my very first programming accomplishment.
Edit: This question & its answers make me feel old.
Though _why hasn't given it much love in the past year or so, for a while I was really excited about Hackety Hack. I think the key for most new programmers, especially children who are more than apt to losing interest in things, is instantaneous feedback. That was the really wonderful thing about Hackety Hack: a few lines of code, and suddenly you have something in front of you that does something. There are a few similar applications aimed at things like drawing graphics (one of which, I briefly assisted Nathan Weizenbaum on, Scribble!). Kids simply need positive feedback that they're doing something correct on a regular basis, else there's nothing to keep them interested in the task at hand. What I think the future is for teaching children to program is some sort of DSL built on top of a language with friendly syntax (these would include, arguably, Ruby, Python, and Scheme) whose purpose is to provide an intuitive environment for constructing simple games (say, Tic-Tac Toe, or Hangman).
I think you should start them off in C. The sooner they can get the hang of pointers the better.
See Understanding Pointers and Should I learn C.
I think the first question is: what sort of program would it be interesting to create? One of the things that got me started with programming as a kid (in BBC basic and then QBasic) was the ease of writing graphical programs. I could write a couple of lines of code and see my program draw a line on the screen straight away.
The closest I've seen to that sort of simplicity recently are the pygame library for python and Processing, a set of java libraries with an IDE.
I imagine that hacking on web pages would be another good way to get started: that would entail HTML, Javascript (using a library like jQuery), perhaps PHP or something along those lines.
Whatever tools you provide, the crucial thing is for it to be easy to get started straight away. If you have to write twenty lines of correct code and figure out how to invoke the compiler before you see any tangible results, progress is going to be slow.
There are many good suggestions here already. I really agree with Kronikarz. Get a retro computer (or emulator) that you are interested in and teach with that. Why a retro computer? Basic is built in. Making sounds and primitive graphics is a trivial task. The real deal might be better than an emulator because it will be a bit more fascinating to a child who is used to seeing only modern devices.
As I said here, I'd go for Squeakland and the famous Drive a Car example (powered by Squeak).
Smalltalk syntax is simple, which is great for children.
And later as the child evolves, he can learn more complex and even very advanced concepts that are also in Squeak (eg. programing statefull webapps with automated refactoring and automated unit tests!).
And like #cpuguru and #Rotem said, Scratch (also Squeak based) is great too.
I think Java might be a good choice simply because you can make GUIs easily, and see "cool things" happening. For the same reason, maybe any of the .NET languages. I've also heard good things about scripting languages (Ruby and Python, especially) for getting kids to learn how to program.
Well, if they're young and haven't learnt their ABC's you could try them on BF - non of those pesky letters and numbers to deal with.
I'll get me' coat.
Skizz
I would go with what I wish I had known first: a simple MS-DOS box and the integrated assembler (debug). It is great to really learn and understand the basics of talking to a computer.
If that does not scare away a child, then I would go the "next level up" and introduce C. This shouldn't be hard given that the basic concept of pointers, registers and instructions in general are well-understood by then.
However, I am not entirely sure, where to go next. Take the big jump to Lisp, Haskell or similarly abstracted languages or should there be some simple object oriented languages (maybe even C++) be thrown in or would that more hurt than help?
Looking at Alice, I see it is "designed for high school and college students". There appears to be another language/version called Story Telling Alice that is "designed for middle-school students"
Alice Download Page
I think Context Free Art might be a good choice, with output of graphics, it makes it a lot of fun learning about context-free grammar.
Try [Guido van Robot][1]. It's an excellent introduction to robotics, and it's a great way to introduce kids to the programming side of things (vs the "building the robots" side).
Wasn't Smalltalk designed for such a purpose? I think Ruby would be a good choice, as a descendant of Smalltalk.
I know in the first few years of high school we were 'taught' Logo, and strangely, HTML. After that, the progression went to macros in MS Office, followed by basic VBA, followed by Visual Basic.