Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Universities finally realize that Java is a bad intro programming language

thenextweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 132 posts

Re: Universities finally realize that Java is a bad intro programming language

#121

Post by phailhaus »

enraged_camel wrote: post #111
detaro wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the first programming course many students can't judge "what works and what doesn't" yet, or even appreciate the details if you tell them, and are busy enough with the basic concepts behind what they are doing. You also can't really teach only an opinionated subset of the language, since students use all kinds of material to learn. Material about JS is often steeped in environment details (browser, nodeJS, JQuery,…

>>In the first programming course many students can't judge "what works and what doesn't" yet That's what the instructors are there for...

Sure, given enough instructors and a huge amount of time you could probably teach it. But starting with javascript gives you almost no benefits and saddles you with the huge burden of attempting to teach a language known to have many quirks and strange conventions.

Re: Universities finally realize that Java is a bad intro programming language

#122

Post by smsm42 »

weberc2 wrote: post #117
smsm42 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No IDE" is not exactly a plus in my book. Surely, you can write code in vim (or notepad) but doing any proper work requires proper tools, and good IDE is among the first ones you'd need.

I have no problem with `vim-go`. Go works without an IDE because the language has a simple project model which lends itself to good, modular tooling. You can still use an IDE with Go if you like, but no one is twisting your arm.

Nearly everything works without an IDE. There are added services making working easier in IDE though. Saying "no IDE is needed because the modular system is so good" usually either a delusion or kind of misguided roughshod pride ("in my time, we just made bits by banging rocks together, you kids are so spoiled") that sacrifices productivity for no real reason.

Re: Universities finally realize that Java is a bad intro programming language

#123

Post by cableshaft »

anthonybsd wrote: post #2

I'm not sure I'd consider a decision to move from Java to JavaScript an improvement. They are going from a bloated syntax to a bad-habit goldmine. Why not go Java -> Python instead?

Most do. From the article:

"According to research published by Philip Guo on the ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) website in 2014, Python is now the most popular language for teaching introductory computer science in the United States.

Eight of the top 10 U.S. computer science departments, and 27 of the top 39 (69 percent) use the language to teach the fundamentals of Computer Science."

Re: Universities finally realize that Java is a bad intro programming language

#124

Post by scarface74 »

jacquesm wrote: post #45
ashnehete wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. Although JS is a powerful language, it is not suitable to teach in an introductory environment. How about C? It makes the student grasps not only logical constructs but also introduce a portion of computer organisation and architecture.

JS is a powerful language for a narrow domain. That makes it totally unsuitable as an introductory language because if the domain you wish to move to is not web development you now have to restart all over again with another language. Python would be better, java wasn't all that bad as a universal language it is applicable to many domains. But the ECT cycle of java could be seen as a drawback, python would remedy tha…

I'm no lover of JavaScript -- especially without TypeScript -- but JS is the most universal language. There are frameworks to create server side components, Android apps, iOS apps and windows app

Not that JS is optimal for any of those use cases.

Re: Universities finally realize that Java is a bad intro programming language

#125

Post by weberc2 »

smsm42 wrote: post #122
weberc2 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no problem with `vim-go`. Go works without an IDE because the language has a simple project model which lends itself to good, modular tooling. You can still use an IDE with Go if you like, but no one is twisting your arm.

Nearly everything works without an IDE. There are added services making working easier in IDE though. Saying "no IDE is needed because the modular system is so good" usually either a delusion or kind of misguided roughshod pride ("in my time, we just made bits by banging rocks together, you kids are so spoiled") that sacrifices productivity for no real reason.

You're plainly misinformed. According to the most recent Go developer survey, only 12% of respondents use an IDE; the rest use text editors (in fact, more people use vim specifically than all IDEs combined). Developing Go without an IDE is quite feasible. The particularities of IDEs which make them more productive than text editors are artifacts of the poor project system found in most languages. If you fix the problem at its root, you're free to reap the efficiencies of a proper editor instead of the mediocre one that comes bundled with your IDE.

Of course your conclusion that IDEs are more somehow productive than text editors is completely baseless (or perhaps only based on experience with Java and the like).

Re: Universities finally realize that Java is a bad intro programming language

#126

Post by feelandcoffee »

jnellis wrote: post #12

Winston Churchill said it best, "Java is the worst introductory language except all those that have been tried before."

Churchill was one of the best coders out there. Like when he said "My Java code be buged. But in the morning will still run, and you will have to update your npm dependencies".

Re: Universities finally realize that Java is a bad intro programming language

#127

Post by smsm42 »

weberc2 wrote: post #125
smsm42 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nearly everything works without an IDE. There are added services making working easier in IDE though. Saying "no IDE is needed because the modular system is so good" usually either a delusion or kind of misguided roughshod pride ("in my time, we just made bits by banging rocks together, you kids are so spoiled") that sacrifices productivity for no real reason.

You're plainly misinformed. According to the most recent Go developer survey, only 12% of respondents use an IDE; the rest use text editors (in fact, more people use vim specifically than all IDEs combined). Developing Go without an IDE is quite feasible. The particularities of IDEs which make them more productive than text editors are artifacts of the poor project system found in most languages. If you fix the probl…

> According to the most recent Go developer survey, only 12% of respondents use an IDE;

There are two possible reasons for this I can see:

1. Go is so awesome that unlike any other language I've used in my multi-decade carrier, it can not be improved with an IDE. It's just an ideal and any attempted improvement would just spoil it.

2. There's no decent IDEs for Go and Go developers are forced to do with what they've got.

My experience shows the former is much more probable than the latter.

> Developing Go without an IDE is quite feasible

Of course, people programmed when ed was an IDE, and before that. It's humanly possible. Is it better? I highly doubt it.

> The particularities of IDEs which make them more productive than text editors are artifacts of the poor project system found in most languages

I'm sorry but this statement sounds both misinformed and fanboyish. There are tons of benefits to IDE which have nothing to do with "poor project system" - from module management to task management to refactoring to keeping integrated information about the project to code assist, etc., etc. I could spend an hour writing them. Claiming that Go "fixed" need for IDE sounds, excuse me for being blunt, laughable. It's like when iPhone was first released, I heard some fanboy claim that iPhone interface is so intuitive one doesn't need copy-paste (first version didn't have it). Of course, next update added copy-paste and iPhone users (including the said fanboy) are happily using it ever since.

> or perhaps only based on experience with Java and the like

Yes, it is based on almost 30 years of experience with programming in multitude of languages and environments, and this experience is why I find claims that Go is so awesome it needs no IDE so laughable. I'm sorry to look self-aggrandizing here, but you asked about it so I have to say it I guess.

Re: Universities finally realize that Java is a bad intro programming language

#128

Post by ferdterguson »

wlesieutre wrote: post #50
atarian wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you only need a browser. When you're just a beginner, setting up an environment can be extremely painful.

Especially once you get into managing dependencies. Virtual environments (whatever this year's flavor is, venv I think?) are a mess. I was trying to get VS Code to execute a python project in its virtual environment but gave up and just went back to running it in a terminal. There's probably a way to do it, but I poked at it for a while and didn't figure it out. Javascript might have its hassles, but even when you ge…

I had the same struggles. Eventually I just went to pycharm, which is great and has full support for any environment you want.

Re: Universities finally realize that Java is a bad intro programming language

#129

Post by wlesieutre »

ferdterguson wrote: post #128
wlesieutre wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially once you get into managing dependencies. Virtual environments (whatever this year's flavor is, venv I think?) are a mess. I was trying to get VS Code to execute a python project in its virtual environment but gave up and just went back to running it in a terminal. There's probably a way to do it, but I poked at it for a while and didn't figure it out. Javascript might have its hassles, but even when you ge…

I had the same struggles. Eventually I just went to pycharm, which is great and has full support for any environment you want.

If I were programming as a profession I'd consider it, but $200/year is more than I'm willing to spend on an IDE for a hobby. Especially since I'm writing more C/C++ than Python lately.

Re: Universities finally realize that Java is a bad intro programming language

#130

Post by weberc2 »

smsm42 wrote: post #127
weberc2 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're plainly misinformed. According to the most recent Go developer survey, only 12% of respondents use an IDE; the rest use text editors (in fact, more people use vim specifically than all IDEs combined). Developing Go without an IDE is quite feasible. The particularities of IDEs which make them more productive than text editors are artifacts of the poor project system found in most languages. If you fix the probl…

> According to the most recent Go developer survey, only 12% of respondents use an IDE; There are two possible reasons for this I can see: 1. Go is so awesome that unlike any other language I've used in my multi-decade carrier, it can not be improved with an IDE. It's just an ideal and any attempted improvement would just spoil it. 2. There's no decent IDEs for Go and Go developers are forced to do with what they've…

> I'm sorry but this statement sounds both misinformed and fanboyish.

Fanboyish? Quite a statement from someone arguing that IDEs are necessary--my position is that they're optional. Misinformed? The features you list aren't particular to an IDE--they're available in any pluggable editor, which is a repackaging of my point. I don't mind a rude rebuke, but you're not even vaguely correct. Forgive me for basing my decisions off experience and not your misinformed speculation. ;)

Post reply on HN