Undergrads are stupid? Blame the universities for teaching C and Java

https://archive.rebeccablacktech.com/g/thread/61460559/
/g/ is where CS undergrads hang out. The quality of knowledge of /g/ reflects the quality of their education.

In Brazil you have C in introductory classes, second semester is C and assembly. Why are american CS classes such a joke?

The only way to teach someone properly is:
>pseudoassembly language to make the students get the basic principles of how a computer works (without introducing any platform specific stuff)
>C, to teach basic imperative programming and also memory-related matters
>modern C++ for introduction to OOP, templates etc, and also to make the students understand that automatic memory management is possible without a garbage collector
>a modern OOP language (C#, or possibly Java)
>a meme piece of shit scripting language (most likely Python)
>a pure functional language (most likely Haskell)
>SQL, an actual assembly language and webshit languages (Javascript, HTML, CSS) somewhere along the way

This way you get the full picture, a thorough understanding, and you do it in the proper ascending order of abstraction from the hardware layer.
That's what my university did in my CS course, and it was worth it.
And this order makes retards fail quickly, so here's another upside.

I like Java, its the comfiest language. But I wouldn't trade having my 101 class in C for anything. I believe it was a very valuable experience. Plus, it helped me with OS, Systems programming, and computer architecture later on down the road. Not teaching C just fucks students over later. Maybe it's for the best though cause ee need less JS script fags scraping out a CS degree and calling themselves developers anyway. Stallvolution will eliminate them from the equation.

As a CS major who was taught Java first then C and C++ later. Java was easier to learn, but I wish I was introduced to the complexities of C first. One big thing that I can think of is that Java has a garbage collector so you are basically allowed to write shit code. Once we started learning C, that shit wouldn't fly and the idea of memory allocation was lost on many.

C might be harder to learn, but for CS it's a better foundation imo.

>>36

If that's the case, then surely we'd already languages better than C, yes?

Being popular doesn't make something good. You might as well be asking ``If that's the case, then surely we'd already languages better than Java, yes?'' If you think there were better languages than Java, there were also better languages than C.

There was already PL/I which was made by IBM and the language Multics and some other operating systems were written in. Teaching C is also dumbing everyone down because they don't know anything about programming languages that aren't C-based.

Universities are switching to JavaScript and not teaching pointers at all because C confuses everyone with bad syntax and semantics. There are just so many things wrong with C that I can't even pick one problem. JavaScript, incredibly, is even worse.

>>37
C is ruining universities. We are focusing too much time and energy on something we can't fix when there are so many solutions available. Universities are creating programmers who know nothing but C, can't learn anything but C and C-based languages, and love the C hacker mentality but hate the Right Thing. They want to replace C because it has all of these bugs, but they create more C programmers. The F-35 uses C and C++ because they couldn't find enough Ada programmers. These universities are part of the problem. Not every university, but if they teach C, they are.