Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!uunet!s5!is1.is.morgan.com!is.morgan.com!kiisaka
From: kiisaka@is.morgan.com (Ken Iisaka)
Subject: Re: Smalltalk in CS 1
Message-ID: <1994Oct24.090341@is.morgan.com>
Sender: news@is.morgan.com
Nntp-Posting-Host: bkis109
Organization: Or Lack Thereof
References: <9410211433.AA13245@sci.brooklyn.cuny.edu> <389buq$lbj@crl.crl.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 1994 13:03:41 GMT
Lines: 30

In article <389buq$lbj@crl.crl.com>, robtcram@crl.com (Robert H. Cram) writes:
|> Smalltalk's a bad choice for CS 1.  CS 1 students need to learn how a 
|> computer works, i.e. stacks, function calls, etc.  Later on, they can 
|> learn how Smalltalk hides all that, and how hiding all that's really good.

I beg to differ.

Ok, CS students should learn about stacks, function calls, etc., but what
about assembly language, actual hardware, discrete logic...?  Where is the
line drawn?

Little emphasis is placed on algorithms, abstraction, generalisation, and
other important concepts.

ST is a good platform since it easily lets you abstract concepts you don't
want to care about, and lets you implement them if you want to.  Stack
class only requires no more than a few methods.

Certainly better than C, BASIC, FORTRAN or even PASCAL.

-- 
|  ###    ###  |  ###   ###   ###  |  ###    ###  |  ###   ###   ###  |
|  ###    ###  |  ###   ###   ###  |  ###    ###  |  ###   ###   ###  |
|  ###    ###  |  ###   ###   ###  |  ###    ###  |  ###   ###   ###  |
|  ###    ###  |  ###   ###   ###  |  ###    ###  |  ###   ###   ###  |
|    |    |    |    |    |    |    |    |    |    |    |    |    |    |
|  Ken Iisaka  |  (kiisaka@morgan.com)  |  Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc   |
|  1 Pierrepont Plz, Brooklyn, NY 11201 |   All disclaimers apply.    |
|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|____|___
"Smalltalk Goes Object Oriented" - INFORMATIONWEEK, August 8, 1994, pg. 58
