i was lucky to be among the middle of the C++ wave and not the end. When I was a freshman in high school, I think it was the 2nd year they were teaching C++, and they continued to teach C++ until my senior year, in which they began to teach Java.
Now the only people who know C++ in that school are the seniors mainly (the juniors too, but they have been heavily under the influence of the Java tidal wave).
I personally think it is a huge mistake.
They think that, but I presume they are wrong. Java does seem better for teaching at first glance, but in the end it is not. It is horrid for teaching compared to C++.Quote:
Because Java is better for teaching. Who knows, in a few years there may be no Java classes, just Python or something similar.
Right now I am in sophomore level Computer Science classes here at Brigham Young University (I myself am a freshman), and pretty much everyone I know in the CS program is a Java programmer, because BYU has also switched to teach Java in its beginning programming course.
In consequence, these people have the hardest time understanding what a pointer even is, because they are so used to EVERYTHING being allocated dynamically. They do teach C here in a beginning class, but cover it only for a few weeks, and so people have almost no time to learn it.
And then there is also a C++ class at the sophomore level which is pure C++ programming, and so they do finally get to taste it then, but they have the hardest time learning it because of the issue with pointers and memory allocation.
In that sense it is MUCH better to learn C/C++ first, and then learn Java, so peoples minds dont get all screwed up.