Turbo C compiler
Just wondering, if anybody had faced a situation like me. When i was doing my college, i was introduced to C language. U don't believe i started programming C language using turbo C compiler (Well i am talking about 3 years before). Thats because my college never used any standard compilers and on windows 98 platform. And the surprising news is, they are still following the same thing. Which mean that most of the student who coming out that college are educated with the non standard stuff.
How funny is this, is this because the teachers are not well educated about the standard or the language or they are not really bothered about it. Probably they are saving money on not buying a new OS and just saving time on not downloading the free available compiler GNU to be installed on all those machines.
How funny is this.
I agree it is an issue that needs addressing. Most students will prob at home have the latest OS. Be that WinXP or even Vista. Turbo C is an acient compiler that belongs in a museum. The thing is, most colleges and uni's have been set a certain budget, and stick with an old golden rule. If somthing works, why change it?
The only snag with this rule, like you stated is the students will have to unlearn a few things in the language to make the code compile on the more standard compliant compilers. I am sure that college profs are well aware of this fact, and I hope for the future of computer science courses, that they either update their systems or teach standard compilant code.
And i am pretty sure the college will never improve. i have even complained about this issue but they don't take those stuff serious. If there is anything like pay rise or bonus they all will be in the first in the Q lol .
God help those guys
It won't change until employers start turning round and saying that they're not going to consider students taught in a museum.
Tutors have no incentive to update their own skills. So long as they keep teaching something which looks like C, and handing out some percentage of "pass" grades, they're happy.
The problem being, it takes a lot of effort to learn (to the point you can teach) standard C if you've suffered from many years of TurboC brain-rot.
my college uses Dev-C on windows 2000/NT. if you want to install sommin then its pretty easy, i managed to boot one of the computers up with a knoppix disc, after i saw one of the technitions input the bios password lol, they are as strict as can be with the internet, but are pretty useless every where else.
Actually I had a small debate with a friend of mine just this New Year's Eve about this same issue. He argues that while it would be desirable that Universities and teachers made that extra mile and updated themselves, it is also true that the objective is not to prepare students to be C++ programmers, and certainly not to be C++ Standards effective students. The objective, he adds, is to prepare students for programming in general. C++ is not even part of some universities program. He asked me how C++ non standard that is. :D
If some university program brushes on more than one type of programming language and more than one type of programming paradigm, their mission is done. And the proof it works, he told me, is that the community at large through forums like these, or any other medium, can instill on the students that concern for standard and correct code without any loss to the teaching process.
I must say he sort of convinced me.
> it is also true that the objective is not to prepare students to be C++ programmers
You can be damn sure that it will appear on their CVs, whether it was the intention or not to actually teach C++.
Teaching "how to program", and learning C++ by osmosis in the process is not the same as teaching "how to program in C++".
> And the proof it works, he told me,
Is this proof based on personal experience of having to teach remedial programming skills to the various dim-wits which colleges sometimes spit out?
Judging from the use of 'goto' in a 5-line program which we see on occasion, it seems like they're trying to kill two birds with one stone, and failing to get either of them. They neither know how to program properly, nor do they know enough C++ to qualify as a beginner.
I must agree there are some gross mistakes here and there from the part of teachers. But I don't see that as a norm. Not at least from what I can perceive from the student posts on these forums. I would probably place my bet on "generally the quality of C++ teaching in universities around the world is sufferable".
I do agree, mind you, there's nothing like starting on the right foot. But issues like void main, unnecessary goto's, magic numbers, etc..., that are usually not a concern in a university context, are easily solved. I fail to remember anyone to refuse our advice on these matters. They understand it, and adapt without any risk to their teaching process.
Frankly, the real evil happens when you start getting payed to program. Being taught by coworkers to derive everything from one base class, to over or under optimize, cast everything just because its easier, create monolithic classes,... just do what you have to do to finish the project on time,... that's the teaching that worries me, because most of these habits are much harder to solve considering the natural resistance to change and the "it works, doesn't it?".