On 17 Jun 2005 05:30:25 -0700, "Michele Simionato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I fail to see the relationship between your reply and my original >message. >I was complaining about the illusion that in the old time people were >more >interested in programming than now. Instead your reply is about low >level >languages being more suitable for beginners than high level languages. >I don't see the connection. I've been told in the past that one reason for which is good to start from high-level languages is that you can do more with less. In other words I've been told that showing a nice image and may be some music is more interesting than just making a led blinking. But if this is not the case (because just 1% is interested in those things no matter what) then why starting from high level first then ? I would say (indeed I would *hope*) that 1% is a low estimate, but probably I'm wrong as others with more experience than me in teaching agree with you. Having more experience than me in teaching programming is a very easy shot... I never taught anyone excluding myself. About the 1%, I've two brothers, and one of them got hooked to programming before me... the other never got interested in computers and now he's just a basic (no macros) ms office user. So in my case it was about 66%, and all started with a programmable pocket RPN calculator ... but there were no teachers involved; may be this is a big difference. Andrea -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
