Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site harvard.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!floyd!whuxle!mit-eddie!genrad!wjh12!harvard!kevin From: kevin@harvard.UUCP (Kevin Crowston) Newsgroups: net.lang Subject: Re: Object oriented languages Message-ID: <268@harvard.UUCP> Date: Tue, 12-Jun-84 14:24:17 EDT Article-I.D.: harvard.268 Posted: Tue Jun 12 14:24:17 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 14-Jun-84 00:04:02 EDT References: <1979@mit-eddie.UUCP> Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard Lines: 20 Here at Harvard we tried teaching the introductory programming course (AM110) in a higher level language: SCHEME. (I was a teaching assistant for the course.) Unfortunately, the implementation we had (which was written in T) was so slow and the machine so crowded that most students spent about 50% (or more) of their time waiting for the computer to do anything. This year, the course went back to a little assembly language, a lot of C and some LISP, with better results. I do not believe that the advantages of teaching SCHEME outweigh the need for more resources or the fact that the other courses here (and the jobs that the students want the experience for) use more traditional languages (like C). I think the couple of weeks exposure the students now get is enough to at least let them see that there are other ways of programming; the details can wait for a higher level course. I should probablly point out that the opinions above are my own and in no way reflect the opinions or policies of Harvard University or any of its faculty. Kevin Crowston harvard!kevin