Edward Elliott wrote: > Alex Martelli wrote: > >> While Mozart appears cool, I really think that a wider variety of >> languages would help -- some machine code (possibly abstract a la >> Mixal), C (a must, *SO* much is written in it!), at least one of C++, D, >> or ObjectiveC, either Scheme or Lisp, either *ML or Haskell, either >> Python or Ruby, and at least one "OOP-only" language such as Java, C#, >> Eiffel, or Smalltalk. > > > Yeah I agree that more is better. The problem is using a new language > every couple courses without bogging down in implementation details. > Personally I'd just say "Here's a book, learn it yourself". It's what > they gotta do on the job anyway.
Yes - start them explore. I'd not want to be "teached" a specific _language_ in a course longer that one day. A language cannot be teached. Who of the posters in this thread want themselves to be _teached_ more than one day on a language? I've seen many graduates who "know" Java, C, this and that words and patterns, but hardly can write a loop and evolve things. Those, who can write loops are mostly self-educated and can do all things quickly in any language. Isn't the fun, finding the right tools for certain purposes one-self? The job of (CS) courses more to provide a map ( "what fun to explore yourself" ) and display extremes (ASM and Lisp) to prevent from identification ? -robert -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
