Author: Tony Werten
Date: 00:28:58 08/12/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 11, 2004 at 17:25:14, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >On August 11, 2004 at 14:36:50, José Carlos wrote: > >>On August 11, 2004 at 11:54:44, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >> >>>On August 11, 2004 at 09:43:18, Daniel Clausen wrote: >>> >>>>On August 11, 2004 at 09:42:04, gerold daniels wrote: >>>> >>>>>what is the best to program a chess game in. c.c++,c#. which is the easy one to >>>>>learn and the best to program in. >>>> >>>>I predict you will get at least 4 different answers. ;) >>> >>>Here we go with one of them: >>> >>>For writing a chess engine you cannot expect to get a reasonably fast thing >>>without using C/C++. And when using C++ try to avoid some expensive features of >>>the language. Quoting Edsger Dijkstra: >>> >>>"Object-oriented programming is an exceptionally bad idea which could only have >>>originated in California." >>> >>>Of course I disagree with that, as there are many benefiots in OOP. But still, >>>there is something in what he says :) >>> >>>If you are looking for easier languages (especially for building graphical user >>>interfaces), Java and C# are reasonable options. Java has the advantage that it >>>can run on any platform and is used by many major-league companies. On the other >>>hand .NET framework will already be present in Longhorn Windows, which will ease >>>the distribution of your programs. But at the moment, I would recommend Java >>>over C#. >>> >>>Finally, unlike Jose, I would recommend you to stay away from Visual Basic, or >>>any other thing that has the word BASIC in it. Again quoting Edsger Dijkstra: >>> >>>"It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have >>>had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally >>>mutilated beyond hope of regeneration." >>> >>>and >>> >>>"Teaching BASIC should be a criminal offense." >>> >>>Visual Basic is a very advanced language in comparison to the primitive BASIC, >>>but still it does mentally mutilate you :) >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>Sargon >> >> That might be the reason why I'm mentally mutilated, as I first learnt BASIC >>for the Amstrad (some centuries ago). > >I first learned BASIC too (actually QBASIC). And when I moved to C, my first >programs were full of "goto". It took me some time to abandon such unhealthy >BASIC habits. > >Nowadays Visual Basic is chosen for simplicity. But if my 13 years old sister >could learn C with rather ease, then everyone can. The problem with C/C++ is >that they don't provide an easy way for creating GUI (unlike Java, C#, Visual >Basic, etc). That is the only advantage of Visual Basic over C for beginners. I have been playing with Visual C 2005 beta, and this argument isn't true anymore. They copied the whole forms idea from Delphi. I always picked Delphi because it's the only fast language that can also easily create a userinterface, but with the new Visual C this argument doesn't even hold anymore. Tony > > > >> But from my mutilated perspective, learning process takes place from simple to >>difficult. Kids don't learn advanced mathematics before they learn to add and >>substract. Learning function calls and recursion and strings with an intuitive >>and friendly language like VB can't hurt IMO. Note that old BASIC was not >>friendly and intuitive, and I wouldn't recommend it, but VB is really easy. >> But I admit I'm not a teacher, and your experience is much more relevant than >>mine. >> The fact is that I can now program C, C++, Java, VB, BASIC, assembly, LISP, >>PROLOG, SQL, Delphi... and I don't feel the order in which I learnt them put >>extra difficulties in the learning process. >> >> José C.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.