From: James Herdman <james.herdman@...>
Date: 2006-02-24T14:53:33+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby as First Language

On 2006-02-23 13:55:44 -0500, "Glen" <glen_ap@yahoo.com> said:

> James H. wrote:
>> Doubly, it takes a long time to learn how
>> to think in objects -- something I admit, myself, to just be getting
>> the hang of.
> 
> I think there are two flaws in your argument.
> 
> 1) Your experience does not set the standard for everyone else.

Of course =)

> 2) I assume you started with a language similar to C (or at least
> procedural), and then learned OO. Because it took you a long time to
> fully grasp OO, you think it is best to start with a procedural
> language. ?? Is there no possibility that it took you longer to grasp
> OO *because* you started with a procedural language?

There's quite a bit of merit to what you said, and it's quite possible.  And...

> Alan Shalloway, one of the authors of "Design Patterns Explained"
> argues that avoiding design patterns makes it harder to learn them
> object-oriented design. Instead, he introduces his students to
> object-oriented design *and* design patterns and has found the students
> learn object-oriented design faster.

As suggested by this statement, I *did* find OO easier to grasp and 
understand once I started learning design patterns.  I suppose I worry 
that if someone isn't taught OO well that they're just going to end up 
like me and program some sort of pseudo-OO crap and just end up 
enforcing bad habits.

You're right, his experience is much more extensive than mine and I'd 
trust it more.  Just sharing my $0.02 though =)

Kindly,

James