• 0

What is (are) the best programming language(s) for beginners?


  

465 members have voted

  1. 1. What is (are) the best programming language(s) for beginners?

    • Pascal
      13
    • Java
      68
    • Python
      36
    • Vb.net
      50
    • Basic
      23
    • Delphi
      6
    • C
      37
    • C++
      37
    • C#
      100
    • Smalltalk
      0
    • Lisp
      1
    • A++
      0
    • Curry
      1
    • Haskell
      2
    • Ruby
      12
    • Perl
      8
    • Other (refer)
      9
    • PHP
      62


Question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Let's say someone's starting off with a background (from 10+ years ago) in Visual Basic. Going back into programming without all that much knowledge. Would eventually like to make little 2D games and helpful little apps, maybe contribute to open source projects. C#, C++? I'm leaning C++ right now with a later transition into C# and maybe some Objective C for ipod app development in the future.

I'm starting off quaint, but would like to turn it into a profession.

  • Like 1
  • 0

Depends what kind of open-source projects. I'd say open-source projects use C++ more than any other language, although often they have no reason for using C++ other than making their lives more miserable than need be (and ensuring the project fails). Still, a lot of them use C#, Python and others.

C++ is great for learning how computers and operating systems work, while getting acquainted with principles of OOP. It's not so great for making desktop applications, in general. What bugs me is how C++ is selected sort of "by default" for many projects when there are a lot of better choices out there, choices that would lead to a faster and less frustrating development experience, and probably to a better product in the end. C++ is held in way too high esteem. Sure, you need it to develop for PS3. But for Windows? Maybe, but probably not.

  • 0

I learned C++ first, then Java, C#, Perl, then C for system programing, and sone other stuff that I forgot like smalltalk, scheme, and prolog for my Programing languages course. Oh also FuzzyCLIPS for my Intelligent Systems course.

  • 0

I learned Visual Basic (back when it was VB6) and then learned Java. I'd say Java is the more powerful of the two, but VB may help you get your head around programming concepts a tad easier (this IMO is the absolute greatest barrier to learning programming in any language - it's a total paradigm shift in thinking patterns). After learning Java and VB I eventually moved onto C++, which is also a great programming language (but definitely not for beginners IMO). You can learn C#, it's okay, but once you've learned VB, Java and C++ learning C# is well, up to you. At the moment I'm re-learning Java (it's easy enough to forget after 3 years of constant C++) but definitely going to be moving onto PHP and Objective-C because I'm one of those weird people that just love to learn it for fun - PHP more specifically will become useful for me as it'll help me make improvements to the forum I'm an admin on, but that's another story altogether.

So, tl;dr, just go for Java. It's easy enough to begin with and it'll help you pick up common programming concepts fairly easy too.

EDIT: Also, what revvo said.

  • 0

Suggesting to start on a harder, heavier language? Really?

I am keen to understand your thoughts further?

Once you learn C and C++ going to higher level languages like Java, C# and Objective-C is a piece of cake. I also believe some of the concepts you learn with a lower language like C are very valuable in understanding how programming work...something that will be harder to learn in a higher level language

If he just wants to code for fun and he doesn't really care about programming, going straight to C# or Java is a pretty good idea

Rudy doesn't believe a person should enjoy learning to program. Don't mind him.

No, I just believe there are valuable lessons to be learned from C and C++

If he just wants to program as a hobby and isn't very serious about it then by all mean go straight to a higher level language like C#

  • 0

I learned C++ first, then Java, C#, Perl, then C for system programing, and sone other stuff that I forgot like smalltalk, scheme, and prolog for my Programing languages course. Oh also FuzzyCLIPS for my Intelligent Systems course.

Forgot Assembly (hate it, hate it, HATE IT), Verilog, VHDL. I think out of all the languages I learned I really like Verilog. I had to simulate a CPU with it and I felt it was my only class where I was doing real work. Java and Assembly were just create games classes and I learned a lot about Object-oriented programming with Java so I agree with people who are saying to take that first. Java almost does everything plus the kitchen sink and the Java API Docs are some of the best (along with .NET's) documentation I have seen.

  • 0

There is no reason why C or C++ can't be enjoyable to learn. It all comes down to whether you have a real interest in learning how things work, or if you just want to push a few buttons in a wizard and be instantly rewarded on a massive scale. Pick whatever suits your style.

  • 0
No, I just believe there are valuable lessons to be learned from C and C++

If he just wants to program as a hobby and isn't very serious about it then by all mean go straight to a higher level language like C#

While I agree that learning C++ should be part of the curriculum of any serious programmer, it's questionable whether it should be chosen as a first programming language. One can very well learn memory management and the low-level APIs like Win32 after having learned variables, loops, classes, encapsulation, etc., in a higher-level language. As a path it presents less resistance and more gratification. I was exposed to a variety of programming languages before C++, some old and cruddy, some very good, as a result I already had a critical look at it when I started. I remember asking my teacher why were header files needed (unlike in any other language, save for C, but I didn't know C)... he said it was because it was cleaner to have the declaration separate. :laugh:
  • 0

There is no reason why C or C++ can't be enjoyable to learn. It all comes down to whether you have a real interest in learning how things work, or if you just want to push a few buttons in a wizard and be instantly rewarded on a massive scale. Pick whatever suits your style.

Name one programming language where you can "push a few buttons in a wizard" and magically have a program that can do everything.

Go ahead. I'm waiting. :rolleyes:

  • 0
One can very well learn memory management and the low-level APIs like Win32 after having learned variables, loops, classes, encapsulation, etc., in a higher-level language.

You can learn all about variables, loops, classes, encapsulation, etc in C++ without having to worry about advanced memory management and low-level APIs. All that complicated stuff can be done whenever the person feels ready. It's very easy to make a simple app in C++.

  • 0

I've found Java and C# are good because they take something from a bunch of languages, which makes learning other things easier. PHP is a good in-between for scripting and programming, but I've found that my PHP habits create some re-familiarization time when switching to Java. Python and VB, don't like the syntax, and it's very different from other languages so transitioning would be a bit more difficult.

  • 0
As a technical lead I am begging you to stop suggesting C# as a beginners language. I ve seen it all.

Start with VB and when you realise whats going on in the .NET Framework start looking into C#. VB gives you lots of bad habbits though...

Care to explain why C# wouldn't be a good choice? And why do you recommend VB instead if it teaches bad habits?
You can learn all about variables, loops, classes, encapsulation, etc in C++ without having to worry about advanced memory management and low-level APIs. All that complicated stuff can be done whenever the person feels ready. It's very easy to make a simple app in C++.
It's not so much the memory management that's the problem, it's the confusing syntax, the complicated compilation model (you can't get away without understanding the concept of translation unit and the real purpose of header files for long), the poor libraries, the duplicated features (is a string const char* or std::string? C or C++ libraries? etc.), and the relatively unhelpful IDE support, that all combine to produce a remarquably painful experience before you learn your way around all that stuff. Which gets in the way of learning basic concepts such as variables, loops etc.

Example: in C#, to be able to use a class, I just have to write that code somewhere in the project. In C++, I have to ensure the declaration will be accessible in any translation unit in which I want to use the class, that the declaration is guarded from multiple inclusion using include guards, and that the code corresponding to the declaration is available at link time otherwise I will get an error with mangled names that doesn't reference any particular line of code. Oh, and what was that thing about forward declarations?

It gets messy real quick.

  • 0

As pointed out before in this thread, C/C++ forces you to learn lots of things that you probably won't see again in languages like C#, Visual Basic and Java. So for a nice start and learning the basics, I'd recomend anyone to use a high level programming language.

My personal journey started in C/C++, then moved on to VB where I really learned the programmers way of thinking. Then I moved back to C++ again quickly followed by Java. All of those where in a professional environment except for the very first C/C++ teachings. Looking back at those experiences I dont think it makes much difference if I had learned Visual Basic or Java before C++, but I know that first strugle with C/C++ was often about problems not related to any simple programming in itself.

In terms of C#, it was a walkover to learn after Java, and I feel that you can master that basics of any of those and easily enough go into the other.

Because I have something of a softspot for C# with WPF/XAML and LINQ I voted for this.

  • 0

There is no reason why C or C++ can't be enjoyable to learn. It all comes down to whether you have a real interest in learning how things work, or if you just want to push a few buttons in a wizard and be instantly rewarded on a massive scale. Pick whatever suits your style.

Since this is your claim, why don't you answer?

You said it, not me. Therefore, YOU should be the one answering. And if you're complaining about how I didn't quote the phrase verbatim, well get a grip and don't be such a hardass.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!