Wednesday, October 03, 2012

Regarding How to Teach Programming

Andres Valloud posted "...The goal of this improved teaching is to allow everyone to take advantage of programming, not just CS oriented people..."

1 comment:

Former GW-BASIC Programmer said...

For me, after starting with Fortran, GW-Basic was easy to learn and use as a Design Engineering tool. The process was faster than compiling Fortran programs. There was NEVER a problem with GOTO statements if patient and considerate COMMENTS guided the reader through the code, more so with the help of Flow charts TRACE ON Command would follow the execution by Line # and aid debugging. The abandonment of GW BASIC was tragic for those of us who used it in the real world of design engineering. I could and did model almost anything physical, then optimize it with simulations.In mandating structured programming, no more LINE #, no more GOTO, etc, the "powers to be" took a turn in the road that should have been optional. GW BASIC with line #'s was as powerful as one's imagination using dimensioned arrays. Graphic interfaces were not needed to model a device and optimize it. Games and music and colors were not needed to do design engineering, and other serious non-game work. The GW Basic scientific programming tool has been thrown out, I hope JUST BASIC advocates survive, and I hope engineers learn scientific programming, not just what Ap to use. The nerve of critics to say GW-BASIC was not "elegant" places them in an Ivory Tower!