Xref: utzoo comp.lang.misc:4511 comp.edu:3105
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think!mintaka!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!tut!hydra!kreeta!grano
From: grano@cs.Helsinki.FI (Kari Gran|)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc,comp.edu
Subject: Re: Abelson & Sussman
Message-ID: <4567@hydra.Helsinki.FI>
Date: 19 Mar 90 01:01:31 GMT
References: <3793@tukki.jyu.fi>
Sender: news@cs.Helsinki.FI
Organization: University of Helsinki, Department of Computer Science
Lines: 27

(comments on the article of Markku Sakkinen about the A&S)

	It is true that A&S uses LISP (Scheme, to be exact), but then
again, you _have_ to choose a language to teach with.  Scheme has a few
very fine properties that make it suitable for such a purpose, including
first class functions, block scoping, easy syntax and something which I
would call as 'inclination towards functional programming.'

	You're right when you say that it doesn't mention other
programming languages very often.  But the bias of the book is towards
the structure and interpretation of programs, not any particular
languages (just as the title says).  With Scheme, you can teach the
basic _principles_ of e.g. object-orientedness using the first-class
functions without committing to any particular dialect, be it CLOS, PCL,
C++ or anything.  And I think we can all agree on the fact that Pascal
does have some serious drawbacks that lessen its suitability as an
educational language - no first-class functions and other clumsy
limitations.

	I think there's one negative point in the book, though - it goes
too far.  The last chapters deal with writing a compiler, a task which
IMO is not quite the thing to teach in the first course on programming :-).

Kari.
--
Kari Grano	grano@cs.helsinki.fi	Hey, my opinions are just mine..
	"I've got a thousand telephones that don't ring" - R.Z.