Python Advocacy from Bruce Eckel
Bruce Eckel is turning in to the world’s number one Python advocate. He explains his views on Python on his Weblog in Python Answers, elaborates further on the Python productivity boost in the fourth part of his Artima.com conversation, and discusses Python (amongst other topics) in an interview on the Borland Developer Network. In the latter, he has this to say about Python in education:
For me, I find it’s more powerful to understand concepts than particular languages. Of course, you do have to understand languages in order to have implementations, but if I were designing a computer curriculum, I would teach Python first so that people could easily acquire depth in concepts, and then much later introduce languages like Java, C++ and C#, after they had reached the point of not getting confused by details. I think students could acquire the important skills much more quickly that way, and it would make a better use of their time. I’m not alone in this idea; there are more than a few college professors who feel the same way.
I’d love to see Python taught at Bath, where I am convinced that the hassle involved in writing and executing simple Java programs is putting many students off developing their programming skills.
The Ideal Programmer on Bruce’s weblog is also worth a read; it touches upon the idea that 5% of programmers are 20 times productive than the rest, and asks how disinterested programmers can be encouraged to write better code.
<p>tag, which is throwing XMLS parsing errors in Mozilla.James - 22nd July 2003 16:46 - #
Simon Willison - 22nd July 2003 16:58 - #
Harry Fuecks - 22nd July 2003 17:30 - #
The productivity difference figure, ie. 5% are 20 times more productive than the rest or so, is being spread around, although Bruce said he doesn't have any references supporting it. I don't know where they came up with that particular figure, but I would recommend to take a look at Lutz Prechelt's paper The 28:1 Grant/Sackman legend is misleading, or: How large is interpersonal variation really?[pdf]. It's "just" a technical report, not a refereed journal paper, but Prechelt has done a lot of those too and has a solid grasp of statistical analysis.
I don't want to be picky here -- I don't check every figure I spread around -- but these might get out of hand at times. Note too that I do not say that the figure is definitely wrong; it just needs a reference or something, in my opinion.
Jarno Virtanen - 22nd July 2003 19:42 - #
Simon Willison - 22nd July 2003 20:00 - #