> If you take somebody snowboarding and force them to learn how to do a > 720 without teaching them anything else, they will eventually be able to > do a 720. If you instead teach them all the basic moves, how to enter > and exit tricks, and then move into 180s, 270s and 360s, they'll be much > better at snowboarding in general and will naturally learn 720s soon after.
You can't just teach somebody to snowboard without first teaching them how to ski. They need to get a feeling for the snow first, on two boards, learn how to use the lift and so on. But in terms of programming, I agree with Ron. OOP is more natural and closer to real life experiences. Mark On 8/21/07, Steven Sacks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Procedural isn't wrong. OOP isn't right. They're used for different > purposes. The fact is, OOP is a trade off for flexibility and > scalability over speed; speed in development, speed in execution. > Procedural programming has its place (ask any game developer). > > Procedural programming is a necessary and important first step in > learning how to code. It's the best way to learn how programming works > because it's a simplified approach and won't get in the way of learning > basic syntax. > > People with no programming experience will not understand abstract > concepts like classes, inheritance, polymorphism, and encapsulation - > the very things that make up OOP. > > OOP is a specialized dialect, built upon the basic language of > programming. If you don't learn the basics, you can't truly learn the > dialect. It's akin to learning phrases from a French phrase book and > going to Paris on vacation versus learning how conjugation and verb > tenses work combined with vocabulary. Who is going to be more > successful at carrying on rudimentary conversations, or understanding > what's being said to them? > > If we take two students and you teach them OOP for 1 month and I teach > them procedural for two weeks and then OOP for two weeks, my student > will be further along than your student. The reason is simple. When you > learn the fundamentals first you have a greater capacity for > understanding of more advanced topics. > > If you take somebody snowboarding and force them to learn how to do a > 720 without teaching them anything else, they will eventually be able to > do a 720. If you instead teach them all the basic moves, how to enter > and exit tricks, and then move into 180s, 270s and 360s, they'll be much > better at snowboarding in general and will naturally learn 720s soon after. > > Plus, if you sit down with non-programmers to teach them OOP, and you > have to teach them the basics first, you will find yourself naturally > teaching them procedural programming because every time you try to move > into topics OOP, your students will get lost and you'll end up circling > back to explain the basics again. > > OOP is not a beginner topic. > > _______________________________________________ > Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com > To change your subscription options or search the archive: > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software > Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training > http://www.figleaf.com > http://training.figleaf.com > _______________________________________________ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
