Why are people taught about programming in a top-down approach? It's really uncomfortable. People should start with knowing wtf a computer is no?

Why are people taught about programming in a top-down approach? It's really uncomfortable.
People should start with knowing wtf a computer is no?

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    modern computers have so many layers of abstraction that it's easier to just add a crash course of assembly to top down learning

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    no, you want to get people interested. show them how to make a turtle go around in Scratch or something and when theyre hooked you can teach them how to do "actual" programming and dive deeper into the inner workings of a computer

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I at least personally disliked that. I didn't like how I had no idea what was happening initially.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it is somewhat similar to Arduino. now day microcontroller programmers don't know what register is.

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What exactly is a bottom-up approach in this case? What content do you expect?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      basic electronics (very basic), hardware, computer components explained, operating systems, networking, files, compiled vs. interpreted. Just a general "hey, this is what a computer is and what you are using".
      Instead at least in my case I was placed in front of an in-browser script interpreter and taught about variables, and then taught basic html and told to make bad websites. This didn't excite me at all.
      You know when Torvalds, the zuck or Gabe Newell or whatever talk about their first program and how great it was to make a computer say "hello world"? It felt great because they made their own file, were using the terminal on the operating system, compiled their own code and ran it themselves with a command.
      I got fucking nothing out of writing console.log("hi") and seeing it with browser dev tools or using an in-browser terminal writing print("hi") on the left side, pressing a button and then having it appear on the right side.
      But when I made it in C after like a year of learning basic top-level stuff it was actually fun and interesting.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You learned.
        You know enough to know what you're even talking about when you suggest this approach.
        Isn't that proof that it's unnecessary?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Hey. Just so you know C is not low level either.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It's low enough to the point that you're actually doing something.
          I'm not saying that you should start with making a hello world program with your own switches.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >It's low enough to the point that you're actually doing something.
            Python can get you started just fine.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >operating systems, networking, files
        If you were using anything not like Unix or Windows you would be completely confused.

        >It felt great because they made their own file, were using the terminal on the operating system, compiled their own code and ran it themselves with a command.
        Computers don't have to have files, terminals, or commands.

        >how great it was to make a computer say "hello world"?
        >using an in-browser terminal writing print("hi") on the left side
        Some people prefer doing things besides printing text.

        >But when I made it in C after like a year of learning basic top-level stuff it was actually fun and interesting.
        C has nothing to do with how computers work.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You're ignoring what I said before about making a program in C and then just commenting on what followed like I didn't even state the reason.
          >Some people prefer doing things besides printing text.
          I'm not saying people should just make a print text program over and over?
          >Computers don't have to have files, terminals, or commands.
          not the point, the operating system they are using does.
          I'm not implying to throw a beginner into writing his/her own malloc() or explain to them what a deadlock is or how a second chance algorithm works with page replacement. But just the basics, from hardware to kernel software to other software.

          >yet another C kiddo

          I don't really use C for anything and I could have mentioned any compiled language. C isn't my main point.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >If you were using anything not like Unix or Windows you would be completely confused.
          nice larp retard

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >yet another C kiddo

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Should start with something really general, like the OSI layer model, i.e. this is hardware, not software, software does this, you get networks when you use cables or switches/routers between more than one... The companies writing the text books for this stuff are partially to blame because they want people to get bogged down in details instead of troubleshooting or thinking on a component level when designing something.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Do construction workers need to know architecture, structural engineering, or cement bricks, rebar, and 2x4's are made? No, they just need to know how to build shit with the tools they're given.

    That's the difference between computer science and "programing"
    One is a profession, and the other is a dripline of science.

    I get the feeling even colleges get them mixed up these days, perhaps intentionally, because nobody goes to college anymore just to learn shit. They go to college to get a job, which means even if someone says they're studying computer science they're really just want a job as a programmer.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      a construction worker needs to know what a hammer and a nail is and why you are bashing a nail into wood.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [log in to view media]

    >Yet another I just learn C so you all suck thread

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      not my point at all. It was an example.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        [log in to view media]

        >not- not my point

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >not not
          no, not

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    you can’t lie about an ontology based around “bits” and retarded assertions that brains are machines are neural networks, people “think in object oriented terms”, “computer science ISN’T about computers…ok!” if you start with basic logic circuits and transistors. you would be far too close to the root of computing which is just electrodynamics and electrical engineering, very obviously physical deterministic processes that aren’t in any way suggestive of the metaphysics of modern Tech culture. It would also filter retarded people way too aggressively.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [log in to view media]

    Why do we teach toddlers to speak in a top-down approach?

    We should first teach them about quantic mechanics and how it affects the brain that produces/understand any given language.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      bad analogy, we teach with words so you need to learn the words first.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The thing is they can speak pretty well without understanding what is a language. Same with computers.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          no it's still a bad analogy and misses my point entirely. Do you teach a baby to run? No first it crawls. Do you teach a toddler to say "I want milk". No you make funny faces at it and say "booh"

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Not him, but that's a perfect example of we should start with teaching people to do things that are fun, interesting, and easy to understand, and gradually transition them to more advanced topics.
            I call this a "fun-forward" approach.
            In child rearing, and in the arts and humanities, it just so happens that fun-forward approaches tend to be mostly bottom-up.
            But in stem fields, fun-forward approaches tend to be mostly top-down.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      We teach toddlers to speak in a bottom-up approach actually. We start off conversing excitedly with them with back-and-forth unintelligible noises. But giving ours an unsubtle approving and adoring tone, so they know we are happy they're making noises. (See: mother crouching face-to-face with her baby, listening to it babble, and jokingly imitating its babbling back to it so that it squeals and claps its hands.) And then, by teaching them to associate sounds with objects and contexts (see: reading picture book to baby), and letting them listen in and feel included in public conversations mostly beyond their understanding but involving some words they've heard before (see: mother holding baby and having conversation with an adult, and then saying something about the baby in passing, and then turning to the baby and cooing "don't you, isn't that right" etc to it). We don't start off giving them a pencil and telling them "you're stuck in this high chair until you can write lorem ipsum on this piece of paper, get to it, when you're done we can move on to the next class, it will be about how to open your mouth"

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, bottom up so that I can sniff your ass.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I've recently been learning C# and Python. They're both really interesting languages. It's crazy how people can program for over 2 decades yet remain ignorant of certain issues. I'd say the people who write these textbooks are not that far off.

Your email address will not be published.