Hacker News Reader

"However, if you want your Computer Science majors to be able to create the next runtime like the JVMs, .NETs etc. or be able to do some device programming they need to learn C/C++." 98% of all developers don't actually need to write the next JVM, or .NET or something.

"think that Computer Science is cobbling github sourced code with their choice of scripting language." This is the beauty of programming, and I'm sorry you can't appreciate that. Not everyone is willing to stab themselves in the eyeball trying to re-implement the .NET/JVM wheel or other low-level library.

It's the same reason the majority of us don't write assembler anymore. We've moved on and abstracted away from that arcane knowledge. Does that mean that arcane knowledge is irrelevant? For most of us, yes. For others, no.

"Yes, the startup market is hot and sometimes that's all you need but CS is much more than that. CS is about understanding the underlying models and concepts rather than a language." Meanwhile, in the real world, CS is not really necessary for most business problems. No matter how much you wish to romanticize it as a discipline.

However, if you want your Computer Science majors to be able to create [...] they need to learn C/C++.

It doesn't have to be the first language introduced. It should be second. My other comment in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8004582

CS is about understanding the underlying models and concepts rather than a language.

Programming Language implementations are exploratory tools critical to understanding those underlying models and concepts. Indeed, in my experience the "CS is about understanding the concepts" logic is more often than not used as an excuse NOT to teach C.

My first language was Basic (in 1982).

The second was assembly.

I've gotten by in my career (to put it mildly).

What "top tier" undergraduate program is graduating students that can't lay out data structures in memory, don't know types, and so on?

Having recruited 3 dozen interns/jr.programmers from schools in the tri-state area and overseas in the past 5-6 years, you would be amazed how many students don't get these basics.

Those schools actually DO try to teach students about these concepts. How do I know? I personally have spoken to the deans of CS departments. Now imagine these same students, who no longer even hear of concepts such as garbage collection, pointers, etc. because it just works in their chosen language.

I believe the era of a single language for your career is long gone. Most people in their 20s and even 30s today will go through at least 4-5 different languages throughout their career.

Personally, I learned and enjoyed C++ 15 years ago but I do not find it practical for anything I do today. However, the same "impractical" knowledge allows me to get familiarized with a new language in a few weeks and start producing working software.

I don't quite care what language students learn as long as the concepts are understood. However, if the language they first start with hides most of these fundamental concepts, they no longer have any incentive to even learn how anything works.

My first language was Basic (in 1982). The second was assembly.

This is not terribly different than what I suggest. I'm saying in the modern world, Python fills the role of Basic and C fills the role of assembly.

The abstract idea is:

First Language: Clean and simple, to introduce the very idea of coding algorithms for a computer.

Step two: Low-level language requiring a lot of attention to detail. Should be useful for exploring low-level details about computer architecture as well as writing real programs.

Notably: Java doesn't fit very well into either category. There's a lot of overhead for pure beginners, and too many layers between the programmer and the hardware