Best programming language for noob to start with?

[jimcooncat]

And there's always Tcl/Tk! Runs on all kinds of platforms, cross-platform packaging using freewrap, lots of features, and everything's a string. Integrates really well with SqLite for more neat tricks.

It fell out of favour, I believe, because the GUI toolkit (Tk) was soooooo ugly! But that's fixed now.

[tinny]

I have interest in studying search algorithms, indexation, data structures, levels of organization... Yea, exactly the part we build a database on. So, yea, let's say a "low-mid-level". And possibly be able to improve something, who knows put my name to history or at least out of the void of forgotten?

Cool, good luck and have fun

[flynnguy]

Shell scripting (bash) is always handy to know but I'd start with a bit of C or C++ (since most things are based off C) and then take a look at Python.

Once you master one programming language (well at least a lower level one like C) it's pretty easy to pick up other languages.

[scourge]

...but I'd start with a bit of C or C++ (since most things are based off C) and then take a look at Python.

Welcome to Programming Talk. Now hold on to your hat - you're in for a rough ride.

[slavik]

This abstraction from memory management is your crutch.

There, fixed it for you. I see Java applications all too often that have to be restarted in order to work again. These are Java OOM errors, too.

[tinny]

There, fixed it for you. I see Java applications all too often that have to be restarted in order to work again. These are Java OOM errors, too.

Yes you can have poorly written Java applications, can you not have poorly written C applications?

(I think your talking about memory leaks in Java, right?)
This is mostly due to hashing in Java and yep its something Java developers need to be aware of.

FYI:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/ja...225/index.html

So even though I am primarily a Java developer I am still aware of fundamental computer science concepts. Using Java doesn't make me dumb. I am just average like about 66% of people here and I need all the help I can get, im not too arrogant to admit that.

As I said earlier, its about choosing the right tool for the job.

@slavik, how about a challenge? Lets get the forum members to come up with a basic web application spec, you code it with C ill do it in Java (or Groovy which I prefer) and we will see who finishes first and who has fewer memory leaks. Or is it not even worth it? Surely Java is a better tool for this job? As C is better for other jobs, like writing some software for a ATMega16 Microcontroller for example.

[brandon88tube]

Cobol

LOL, I was skimming through and found that funny. My Mother learned that a long time ago and said she hasn't used it for over 25 years.

[jpmelos]

Lol. Did you know Cobol programmers actually earn a lot of money nowadays? There are so few programmers interested in it that the good ones who yet have interest in work with it are hired in high rates. Some applications are too complex to be made again in some more recent language, so becomes finacially viable to just pay someone to support it just as it is, in Cobol.

[Wybiral]

And, maybe, it's beyond that. I actually feel great knowing all that nerdy stuff. xD For me, it's not enough to know only what I'm told in college. And I know I have difficult in some level to understand why some people don't apply themselves harder.

But the argument that really made my mind was that knowing algorithms, how well (or bad) they perform and when you should use them is just as important as (maybe even more than) knowing the low-level issues. Noone can counter-argue that. xD

I've spent many hours coding in both assembly and C, and at the time it felt like I was learning 'real' programming. It wasn't until I started to dip my feet into languages like Python and Lisp and started working on serious projects (and getting paid to do so) in those languages, that I realized how little I actually gained from my knowledge of the inner workings.

Sure, it's fun, and for the fun of it I think everyone should learn assembly and C, it's an interesting challenge. But I don't think it helps you to write programs (aside from those languages) or makes you better in any way.

The real academic beauty lay in things like algorithms and data abstractions, concepts that still apply no matter what language you're in.

[CptPicard]

Okay, time once again for a round of "re-educate the low-level fanboi n00bs to the forum in the ways of the world".

Guys, you've done a good job already so there is little to add but I feel like posting anyway...

jpmelos, this has been one of the hotter topics on the forum for pretty much all the time I've been around -- a couple of years. Every now and then some new guy comes around here and starts thumping his chest about how good he is at C and how lame everyone else is, without having any idea of what he is talking about...

I understand your point. And I respect it. But I defend mine and hope you guys can respect it.

Well, you completely over-estimate the meaning of the low-level languages and underestimate the theoretical and practical significance of higher-level languages.

Let's see if I can explain my points better. The humanity didn't start building structures 40 floors high from the start for a reason. We couldn't just yet. Once we masterized the basics in each level, we evolved and built the first 2-floor, than the 3-floors and... you got it.

Interestingly, before engineers even started wiring computers together, we had lambda calculus which is the thereotical basis for the formal logics we use to understand all Turing-complete programming languages. It is this understanding, and languages that actually derive from this understanding, that are truly significant for our understanding of computation. Implementation details, such as found in C or assembly, are essentially trivial. I really, really can't stress the point enough that most truly guru programmers who shine at languages like Lisp can handle C trivially, and then some.

I think: you will be much better in the advanced topics if you masterized the basics of it.

Advanced topics have nothing to do with the basics as you understand them.

That's why we teach children first to add and only then to multiply. And I think understanding the low-level will help me being a better professional.

Quick, without looking it up -- define "closure" and mention some ways to make use of it?

And struggling does improve the learning. Otherwise, nobody would do math exercises in college.

The difference here is that math classes actually help your learning. Learning something like Scheme is like taking a math class. Learning bit fiddling with pointers is not.

Now I see that, depending on the level you want to program, somethings may be useful while others may be enough to know only the necessary.

Please don't make the mistake of imagining that upping the abstraction level needs to mean "knowing only the necessary" though... it's not a matter of copping out and making things easier. It's about making things more abstract, and good abstractions can be powerful, general, high-level and mind-bending in their applications...

For me, it's not enough to know only what I'm told in college. And I know I have difficult in some level to understand why some people don't apply themselves harder.

These are such ignorant fighting words... you do understand that most respectable university CS programs teach something completely different from C? My Master's degree didn't even have a mandatory C class (and I passed mine by just taking the exam for easy credit), and we're far from a code monkey school. All of my algorithms education has been completely language-independent, and the language-theory and logic stuff I do has much more to do with higher-level languages.

But the argument that really made my mind was that knowing algorithms, how well (or bad) they perform and when you should use them is just as important as (maybe even more than) knowing the low-level issues.

An algorithmic solution will always dominate whatever you'll be able to optimize by switching to a "lower level". It's basic theory.