Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.programming > #6738
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.programming |
| Subject | Re: Programming |
| Date | 2016-07-18 16:25 +0100 |
| Organization | Origin Sonata |
| Message-ID | <nmiscg$5tp$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <6a8820b3-253a-479f-93ec-f2e03efe5753@googlegroups.com> <nmgd5k$mkv$1@dont-email.me> <87d1mcjc3e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <nmh60m$ah6$1@dont-email.me> <a1965183-4bf6-4eca-91ec-e0808ec6ae9d@googlegroups.com> |
On 18/07/16 15:52, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> On Monday, July 18, 2016 at 1:57:12 AM UTC+2, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 17/07/16 20:31, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>>>> On 17/07/16 17:16, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, July 16, 2016 at 5:40:21 PM UTC+2, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>>>> Once you've mastered PHP, you're probably ready to tackle a "real"
>>>>>> programming language (although I'm being unfair to PHP).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Real programs for real users tend to be written in languages such as C
>>>>>> or C++. Toy programs for toy users (e.g. Windows users) tend to be
>>>>>> written in VB.NET or C#. So you kind of have to choose which way you
>>>>>> want to go.
>>>>>
>>>>> Congratulations: good load of bullshit.
>>>>
>>>> Congratulations: well-reasoned argument, carefully thought out and
>>>> skilfully presented to win hearts and minds.
>>>
>>> Your points got exactly the level of reasoned argument that they
>>> deserve. (I thought you were joking so I didn't say anything first time
>>> round.)
>>
>> Ouch. No, I wasn't joking.
>>
>> I answered as I did because the tone of the OP gave me the impression
>> that the OP wanted to learn programming without a lot of investment of
>> effort on his part ("tell me the easiest way"). There is no question
>> whatsoever in my mind that HTML is the easiest-to-learn mainstream
>> computer language (and note that I have carefully avoided saying
>> "programming language"). With only a modicum of knowledge you can
>> produce a reasonable product quite quickly.
>
> OK, few explanations:
>
> With HTML alone, all one can build is static pages: not
> even a contact form, i.e. not even the web of the early
> days.
Absolutely true, except that "static pages" are quite a cool thing to be
able to do if you've never made a computer do anything before, and it
gets the learner used to the idea of nesting, a very important concept
in programming.
> In particular, the fact that you call JavaScript
> "a blind alley" (which was snipped) is *outmost nonsense*.
If your goal is only to write Web apps, then I'd agree. But the OP
didn't say he wanted to write Web apps. He said he wanted to write apps.
So we'd want to steer him in the direction of a more conventional
programming language, I think.
> JS was important already at the time and is more and more
> fundamental for web-based applications nowadays (and not
> only for that, as you can use it server-side as well).
Sure, I agree, but unless I'm very much mistaken it is /only/ used in
Web apps. (Also, it's a bit chaotic for my tastes.)
> It is also a *wonderful* (functional) language, as well
> as a great way (the HTML/CSS/JS combination) to get started...
So now you're agreeing with the "bullshit" that HTML is a good place to
start. Good. (Or were you going to start with JavaScript and CSS, and
then move on to HTML later on? FCOL!)
> OTOH, no real software professional would be bashing
> Microsoft
Shades of "no true Scotsman".
> That said, and disregarding the OP for a moment, there
> is no such thing as "the best way" or even just
> "the best way to get started":
And I think you'll find I made no such claim.
One of the most important characteristics of a real software
professional is an eye for detail. You might want to give some thought
to that. I'm done with you. Thanks for playing.
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Programming HQM <harisqmega@gmail.com> - 2016-07-16 07:07 -0700
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-16 16:40 +0100
Re: Programming Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-07-17 09:16 -0700
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-17 17:53 +0100
Re: Programming Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-17 20:31 +0100
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 00:57 +0100
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 05:36 +0100
Re: Programming Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-07-18 08:13 -0700
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 16:33 +0100
Re: Programming BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-18 16:44 +0100
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 17:01 +0100
Re: Programming Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-07-18 09:16 -0700
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 17:23 +0100
Re: Programming Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-07-18 09:28 -0700
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 18:00 +0100
Re: Programming BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-18 18:28 +0100
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 18:54 +0100
Re: Programming "Ant" <not@home.today> - 2016-07-18 21:12 +0100
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 21:24 +0100
Re: Programming Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-07-18 14:49 -0700
Re: Programming Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-18 20:03 +0100
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 20:24 +0100
Re: Programming Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-07-18 16:17 -0700
Re: Programming "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 19:30 -0400
Re: Programming "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 19:22 -0400
Re: Programming BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-18 16:25 +0100
Re: Programming "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 21:18 -0400
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-19 03:35 +0100
Re: Programming "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 19:37 -0400
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-20 00:50 +0100
Re: Programming "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 19:41 -0400
Re: Programming "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-20 03:31 -0400
Re: Programming "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 21:01 -0400
Re: Programming "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 05:02 -0400
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 10:35 +0100
Re: Programming Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-07-18 10:02 +0100
Re: Programming Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-07-18 07:52 -0700
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 16:25 +0100
Re: Programming Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-07-18 08:32 -0700
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 16:36 +0100
Re: Programming BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-18 13:02 +0100
Re: Programming Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-07-18 13:38 +0100
Re: Programming BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-07-16 22:38 +0100
Re: Programming Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2016-07-17 09:20 -0700
csiph-web