Thread: What are pointers for?

>> In my opinion, it is far more beneficial to teach more appropriate techniques first, then go into finer detail on why those techniques work.
I just thought that pointers are not one of those finer details. I perceived that basic c++ include pointers. You have to know them just like you know int, float, etc; then build up from there.
I would say that one examples of finer details are instructions involved in calling new (alloc, and all that stuff I'm not knowledgeable yet).

See, I understand if people like pointers, but I just think that it's a very bad idea to push them to newbies. You can read up more on my thoughts in the introduction to my tutorial.
http://stud3.tuwien.ac.at/~e0226430/...ationale.xhtml
Not IE-compatible.

What if I say that
if you a Comp Sci student then you have to know pointer early. If a book is designed for Comp Sci course it has to mention pointers; if it is one of "C++ for Dummies" or "Teach Yourself C++ in 21 Days", you decide.
I would certainly dislike the idea if pointers are not taught in one of the 100-level (first year) courses in Comp Sci.

>> Many people are now learning Java as a first language in intro level CS courses.
I thought they're switching to Java 'cause they don't want to use pointers at all?
I need clarification on this one. If Java is taught first, doesn't it become the main language in the school? The whole subsequent material will then be implemented with Java? (Unless you take Intro to Fortran and the like)

Our University switched to Java for the first programming course I think 3 or 4 years ago. Since then, most other courses use Java, too. One lets us choose between C++, Java and C#. One that discusses generics used C++, I think, until last semester, but now uses Java5. And so on.

So, in general, if Java is the first language you learn, most subsequent stuff is done in Java, too.

Is it really so tough to teach someone about pointers and their proper use? I understand that many people are confused by pointers but I think the reason why is because of the black box approach. I read alot about assembly and computer architecture and low level addressing modes and when it came to pointers I understood how they worked. Maybe it is just because they don't provide enough detail or enough context. Whenever I read a C or C++ book they very rarely go into to much detail about memory architecture and addressing modes. I think they should teach basic assembly or an introduction to the instruction set before they teach a high level language. Nothing too advanced. IMO more knowledge is better.
What is that quote?

"A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian* spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."
-Alexander Pope (1688-1744), _An_Essay_on_Criticism_.

I agree that these things should be taught, but I think they should be taught after the basics. My reasons for this are threefold:
1) People who learn on their own want to DO stuff. The best way for them to learn is a way where they have results. People who have to learn still prefer it that way, but they won't walk away if it's different.
2) C++ is a high-level language. If you want to use it effectively, you need to think in design patterns first, how to best map your program design to a code design. Then you can think of how to map the code design to actual code. Learning pointers and this stuff teaches the latter part first, and I think that's a mistake.
3) Building on 2, programmers, especially hobby programmers, often get caught up in the details. They worry too much about minor stuff and don't get anything done. Again, by teaching the high-level techniques first, you can get them to think big in the first place.

I understand your point of view. I guess in my mind, I am able to grasp the concepts better because I can visualize the inner workings. I can see how a character array would be represented in memory. I can see they are a series of 1 byte chunks and that that they are stored in a linear memory area that begins at some address. that address being the pointer. I can see that bye adding 1 byte or 2 bytes or 3 bytes I can access the 1st second or 3rd char variable. in the string. I can see that it has a specific size and that if i index past the end I will end up in some other memory space. Everyone has different learning styles I guess this is just mine. To me having something to anchor my knowledge to is less discomforting then floating on the knowledge of it works somehow but all I need to to do is put this symbol before it to make it a pointer and then put this other symbol before it to make it a reference. Granted it is all a time constraint. What makes for efficient learning? How can I cram the most knowledge into my head in the least amount of time and have it stick? I guess I am stuck in the scientific mode of how does it work so I can understand how everything else works.

The fact is, C++ is far easier to learn than C. And I'm going to take advantage of that in this tutorial. All I expect of you is to accept that you're using things without knowing how or why they work. Explanations will come in time.

I'm extremly glad i'm learning C first. I've found that an indepth understand of how C works, is great to understand other languages, scripting and otherwise. C++ is no exception - regardless of of the extra libraries and data structures B.S. used to make it "simplier".

Many people are now learning Java as a first language in intro level CS courses. Are they worse off because they aren't learning pointers first? I personally don't think so.

Serioulsy if your studying computer science shouldn't you study computer Science. I'd love to see some of those first year students have a look at the JVM and the ubelievable usage of pointers its said to make use of.
Java is a lanuguage built atop C and C++. It is the product of someone's imagination in an attempt to facilitate programming and be the the new PL-1. As it result its failed miserably(regardless of how much shelf space it takes up). Have you looked at JAVA 5?

The point is C (and more importantly the understanding of pointers in C) gives you unbelievable power and advantage when coding. Sure if you want to use a language that abstracts all of that for you, fine, But then why bother going into computer science at all. In fact forget java and learn HTML.

Java is good for what it is, a dumbdowned version for RAD. Serioulsy ppl need to stop comparing it to C there is none.

What makes for efficient learning? How can I cram the most knowledge into my head in the least amount of time and have it stick? I guess I am stuck in the scientific mode of how does it work so I can understand how everything else works

ditto. even if i am a hobbyist programmer