🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <932@its63b.ed.ac.uk> RDI@uk.ac.ed.ecsvax (Rick Innis, CS4) writes:

>Well, at Edinburgh we've been using Pascal for the last few years, but there
>is now a movement afoot to use ML as the first teaching language. I know that
>this year's first year will be getting introduced to ML quite shortly.

This is a really interesting movement you're discussing.  I have used
ML in the classroom, have even implemented a (subset) compiler.  So
far, the only context in which I have seen ML is the university
environment.

This is one of those situations in which a well-intentioned effort
should probably be directed a bit more toward the mainstream.  Perhaps
a language like C++ or Ada (which are languages in widespread use in
industry) would be better than a language which is, in effect, an
experimental language.  I have just changed jobs.  In no interview was
I asked whether I knew ML; in every interview I was asked if I knew C.

>My own experience of learning ML (in second year) had quite an effect on my
>programming style. Learning Prolog also affected it - I think in both cases for
>the better. Functional languages certainly give a greater appreciation of the
>computational process, I think, than procedural languages do. If you want an
>understanding of what's happening at that level, something like ML is a very
>good first language.

Part of the reasoning behind a technical education should be to prepare
a student for the working experience.  I contend that exposing
first-year students to a functional programming language does not fit
that role.

Phil Miller
Opinions expressed are mine, not necessarily my employer's, etc.