[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-edu
Subject:    Re: [kde-edu]: proposal
From:       Matthew Tedder <matthew () tedder ! com>
Date:       2002-06-23 18:53:48
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tuesday 18 June 2002 10:56 am, Anthony Moulen wrote:
> On Monday 17 June 2002 01:41 pm, Matthew Tedder wrote:
> > Structured programming languages are not outdated.  Object-orientation is
> > not the "best" approach for every problem.  If it were, we'd all be using
> > Java for everything.
>
> No, neither is this truly my point, and it is obvious I wasn't clear.
> Teaching a Structured language first then an Object-Oriented language
> after, is an outdated teaching model.  First people learn by association. 
> It is easier to build the abstracts of object-oriented program around these
> common association than it is to build the concepts of structured
> programming.

Different people learn better in different ways.  I think, therefore, 
different people should make tutorials differently.  The tutorial maker and 
viewer are, therefore where the emphasis needs to be at this point.  

But, out of curiosity, I don't understand how you can teach 
Object-Orientation without first covering the structured approach.  In order 
to build a class, you have to know structured programming.  Do you not?  
Every class is basically a container of a structured program at some level.  
It might inherit and so forth, but at the bottom--it must be structured.

>
> And as to the overhead and such, it is minimal when you are talking about a
> beginning programmer.  These people aren't going to be building the next
> Apache web server or Linux kernel tomorrow if they can't even program a
> basic "Hello World" program today.  Understanding the concepts of objects,
> it is easier later to learn to remove objects where they simply do not buy
> you anything, it is harder to learn to build objects when they do buy you
> something when you have learned a structured way first.  The number of KDE
> programs that I have pulled apart to play with, only to find the person
> writing structured programs when it was simply screaming I should be an
> object is staggering.  It is because people first learn structures, and try
> to fit every program into a structured model, only later to then migrate
> toward objects for things that simply can't be done the other way.

Yes... Well...  I think this argument can go both ways.  People who learn 
objects first often make everything an object what the code is screaming, "I 
should not be an object!"  Bad habbits get developed in both directions.

>
> I don't disagree that both models have their benefits as well as their down
> sides.  But in all my experience, it has been harder to reshape someone's
> programming technique to use Objects after they have become overly
> comfortable with structured programming. 

And vice-versa.....

 (And I say this from personal
> experience as well, I always have to slap myself to use objects when
> structured programming simply makes no sense but is still possible).

But this is really senseless talk..   The proof is in the pooding.  We need a 
tutorial maker and viewer and then to built multiple tutorials.  Let the best 
man win--perhaps both should compromise on emphasizing the importance of 
knowing where objects make sense and why.

>
> PS: This may show up twice, I keep forgetting to change my personality to
> the one that can post to this list.
> _______________________________________________
> kde-edu mailing list
> kde-edu@mail.kde.org
> http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-edu

-- 
Anything that can be logically explained, can be programmed.
_______________________________________________
kde-edu mailing list
kde-edu@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-edu
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]