Message-ID: <001001bddc1f$d86163c0$09a531ce@enterprise-z>
From: "Jorge Ivan Meza Martinez" <jimeza AT usa DOT net>
To: <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: RE: Teaching a child to program in C
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 10:51:46 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

I agree with the choice of begin with Logo and Basic instead of C.

I started at 8 years old with a computer, learning little bits of a simple
Basic;

this does not means that a child can not understand C, he will, but now, C
will not be funny, and it is easier and better when learning is fun.  Be
worry about declare variables, types, structs, !pointers!, are not fun and
less to a beginner.

I think that is great, for experience, begin with, for example, Logo,
understand what is and how is programming and learn Basic, later, he will
know enough about programming and will see the limitations of "simple"
languajes, so, by himself will get C, C++, Java, etc....

What here matters is not how young you started or with which languaje you
learned, is to love learn it; if you like it, you will learn anything
 still asm ;o) ).

bye and good luck teaching to your child,

       Jorge Ivan Meza Martinez
               jimeza AT usa DOT net
  jimezam AT armenia DOT multi DOT net DOT com
            jimeza.home.ml.org

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Derek Greene <topcoder AT mindspring DOT com>
Grupos de noticias: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Para: djgpp AT delorie DOT com <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Fecha: Martes, 08 de Septiembre de 1998 11:48 p.m.
Asunto: Re: Teaching a child to program in C


>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
>