home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.programming
- Path: sparky!uunet!ukma!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!bgsuvax!m64-138.bgsu.edu!user
- From: dnebing@andy.bgsu.edu (dnebing)
- Subject: Re: first-year programming languages
- Message-ID: <dnebing-161192134059@m64-138.bgsu.edu>
- Followup-To: comp.programming
- Sender: usenet@andy.bgsu.edu (USENET)
- Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.
- References: <dnebing-141192140340@m64-143.bgsu.edu> <92320.183138BJ020000@NDSUVM1.BITNET> <1992Nov16.161631.2334@coe.montana.edu> <1992Nov16.171543.14359@leland.Stanford.EDU>
- Distribution: na
- Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:44:21 GMT
- Lines: 21
-
- In article <1992Nov16.171543.14359@leland.Stanford.EDU>,
- dkeisen@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dave Eisen) wrote:
- >
- > The main problem I have with inexperienced programmers is that
- > they write *everything* from scratch. They are not good at
- > reusing existing code, especially if the existing code is not
- > as clean as it should be. And they are even worse at producing
- > code that can be reused. Too many years of toy projects in school.
- >
- > Is there really a problem with students not getting enough of
- > a chance to write programs from scratch? Is the state of teaching
- > so bad that students are only asked to make trivial changes to
- > existing code?
-
-
- The problem is that the "toy projects" often deal with the algorithms
- the students have to learn, but they spend so much time creating the rest
- of the "toy project" that the algorithm is practically missed. More of the
- focus has put on the algorithms.
-
- dnebing
-