Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/09/09/09:32:02
Excuse me sir, but I am 14, I started in Basic at the age of 9. Probably
the only reason I didn't start sooner was because my family didn't own a
computer until then. Frankly sir, from my experience, a bright 7 year
old could easily learn C with some simple perseverence, and an
intelligent child _will_ have it. I know, I was there. A 7 year old
will get as frustrated with Basic or LOGO as with C because the
principals are the same all over, just a different interface to the
principal. I encourage any kid who wants to learn to program, and I say
they should be as aggressive in their learning as they want to be. As
for the gentleman with the original question:
Buy a ' x For Dummies' book like Qbasic Programming for Dummies, C for
Dummies, et cetera, they are written in a form a baby could understand
(and that's probably not far beyond the truth :-).
Mr. Breton, your LOGO suggestion is a good idea, but don't denounce the
possibility of a 7 year old learning C, and also spell BRIGHT as such and
not brite, as it is incorrect.
Derek Greene
Tom Breton wrote:
> "John S. Fine" <johnfine AT erols DOT com> writes:
>
> >
> > I have a very bright 7 year old who wants to learn to
> > program. I program mainly in assembler and occasionally
> > in C. I know there are better first programming laguages
> > than C, but I would rather teach him a language that I
> > am comfortable in myself (and assembler is clearly a
> > worse choice).
> >
>
> Pardon me for making a suggestion that you may have already decided
> against, but have you considered LOGO? It's the only language I can
> think of that is meant for a child. And frankly, I don't see a
> 7-year-old, no matter how brite they are, using C without so much
> frustration as to make it a lasting negative experience. "Getting"
> the idea of writing source code at all is a tall order for a
> 7-year-old boy.
>
> If he picks up LOGO easily and seems bored with it or frustrated with
> how little it can do, then is the time to introduce real languages.
>
> Tom
- Raw text -