This is in response to the article Why Johnny Can't Code , over at Salon Tech.
I have heard several people already agreeing with the arguments against this article, so I know I am not alone. Although I completely agree that it is a very good thing for kids to have a quick and easy way to program on their computers, should they have the curiosity, I do not believe the author made very compelling points on the use of BASIC, or anything resembling it. Particularly, I think the author has far too high a reverence for BASIC and fails completely to see the damage the language can do to an aspiring developer, which I won't go into in this article. Conversely he seems to find languages that could fill the gap he says, namely Python, as somehow wrong for a job, which is entirely an incorrect idea. This is pointing from multiple vantages as being written by an unenlightened developer.
Yes, a fundamental understanding of how software works can be a good starting point for a life of technology as a hobby, career, or even just what burns the weather forecast into your toast. Love it or use it, technology with a background is more meaningful. In the past, this was intrinsically bound with BASIC, but that doesn't and should not hold true today. We have moved on out of more than disdain for our old friend and enemy. We have learned better.
Very quickly does the author of the original article mention and pass over Python and Perl as alternatives that don't mean some non-mentioned requirements for the job that BASIC filled in the past. Mentioning of putting his son to C++ after finishing with BASIC make me think that he is not a fan of this class of languages. There is some missing opportunity here, obviously. If he had brought his son to Python, rather than buying an old Commodore 64 out of frustration for finding a good BASIC interpreter for a modern OS, his son could have moved directly to more complex programs in a "basic" language, instead of learning to write the same "basic" programs in a complex language. Python is a fantastic educational language, but shines equally well when scaled to professional usage, which eliminates the bridges needed to cross from one language to the next through the levels of one's programming education.
Some shred of truth found, however, is the problems with bringing a language to the forefront of education in the was BASIC once was. There are too many languages that would argue they are superior. I will not deny that I think none of them old a flame to Python, especially in this context. However, I know I will be debated on this point. The fact remains that BASIC was a bad language, which served a purpose well, but has seen its day and is obsolete for a good reason. We have better ways of doing things, and that doesn't have to mean more complex languages, simply better languages.
David Brin , thanks for wrapping up Foundation , but look into the gaps in your logic about educational programming please, for your son's sake.
I write here about programming, how to program better, things I think are neat and are related to programming. I might write other things at my personal website.
- ► 2014 (52)
- ► 2012 (19)
- ► 2011 (19)
- ► 2010 (32)
- ► 2008 (28)
- ► 2007 (113)
- User Expectations for Free Services
- Thank God for Standards! Or, Thank Someone Else?
- Concurrency and Stabilty. More Zen for Python.
- Responding to Mencia About "Outdated" Technology
- Developing is the new Programming
- 3 1/2 out of 10 Languages You Should Learn Right N...
- The Internet Flashed Me
- But, didn't PHP break the Web in the first place?
- Why Johnny Can Code
- IronPython and a New Era
- Give it a REST
- ▼ September (11)