Related
My final for my last java class will be Monday. What would be a good language with many free sources (poor college student here) to work off of? I've heard good things about Ruby and Erlang but both seem alien to me.
Perhaps there is something I should try in Java first before moving to another language like some kind of framework or libraries that would advice me more than adopting a new language so quickly?
As a Student, i hear those words a lot from many of my professors:
"Its not about the language, its about algorithms!!"
Which after almost 4 years of trying different languages, i find this to be true.
Because if you learn how to do something in one language... the rest is just applying your knowledge using different syntax.
My advice is to stick with what you started (Java), and after you master the basics, then deal with:
Inheritance
Polymorpism
Data Structures
Because you will find the above in almost every language.
Algorithm Animations helped me visualize and understand a lot.
Also read this post.
I would definitely recommend Ruby - as a fun language to learn more about programming. Java is statically typed and strictly object oriented, so it is natural that Ruby feels alien to you.
Ruby is strong in a number of paradigms - especially object oriented, functional and metaprogramming. Learning lots of paradigms and how to combine them will make you a better programmer no matter what future languages you use.
Having learnt Java, JRuby would be good implementation of Ruby to use - it is written in Java and runs on the JVM. Another advantage of JRuby is that you can use Java libraries from your Ruby code. Just install jruby from your package manager and you should be ready to go.
To learn ruby check out the following resources:
Ruby from Java
Ruby in 20 minutes
Programming Ruby
Since you already know java, get a taste of other styles like Python, Perl and Ruby. PHP, Java, and C++ are closely related style wise.
I would recommend looking at Scala, F#/SML/Ocaml and Haskell -- but Scala in particular:
The reason for this is Scala shows that a "fun" statically/strongly-typed high-level (in a real sense) 'OO' language can exist. There are many useful programming constructs that are not possible in Java due to design and implementation limitations. (Scala is by no means a perfect language.)
Even learning just C#3/4 (which generally has a less powerful type system than Scala, although not all areas overlap) will open eyes with constructs that are not easy to do in Java -- simply passing around "functions" as objects or being able to uniformly and easily run queries and manipulations over lists are something out of reach with Java. You can fake closures/lambdas in Java (look at anon-inner classes or the Functional Java library), but it is hardly pretty: Scala and C# add language support for these constructs so they are "natural".
I won't speak ill of Ruby or Python (or many other languages, excluding PHP ;-) -- but one thing that they lack is static typing. Some people find this a blessing, but I generally find it a curse (good static type systems can prove the absence of a number of type problems) -- the problem is that, if Java/C/C++ is/are the only statically typed language(s) you have dealt with, you will think that static typing has to be painful (and implies "too much type annotation" and "too brittle/closed types") -- this is simply not true in more advanced statically typed languages with type inference, view-bounds, typeclasses, etc.
Learning Haskell will really open your eyes up to a different approach -- but it really is a different beast and requires forgetting how language X works. You can write "Java in Scala", even if not advisable/idiomatic, but you really can't write "Java in Haskell".
If you are looking for web development, I would strongly suggest learning PHP (it is a really fun and useful language). If you are looking to develop for the desktop, C++ and if you want to try iPhone / iPad development, try Objective-C.
I took a Java class and I found that it gave me a good foundation for moving to Objective-c, you just need to be careful because the language does not manage your memory usage (no garbage collector). All of the above languages have tons of support freely available on the internet. If you are looking for a technique to learn a language, I find that looking at example code is the best way to go.
Hope this helps!
I Totally agree with what Chris said, Make sure that when you start learning, look for everything in Google, there are thousands of resources available for how-to's about the language you chose to go with.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
In every technical publication, and on this site too, people are always comparing OO languages to Smalltalk. My experience is in Java: is Smalltalk so important that I should study it?
Smalltalk was one of the earliest object-oriented (OO) languages (with others like Simula and Eiffel) and can be said to be extremely "pure" in an OO sense:
Everything is an object and objects are only communicated with via the sending of messages
No primitives (no ints, booleans etc)
No control structures (no for, while, if etc). Sounds impossible but it's true!
No statics
It also pioneered some other, now common, stuff:
the virtual machine (and JIT compilation)
Debugging by inspection
"Hotswapping" running code
the modern IDE
Closures
Duck typing
Model-View Controller (MVC) architecture for UIs
Test-driven development (TDD) and agile methodology
And there are other things connected with Smalltalk which didn't really make it into the mainstream:
"Image"-based system rather than file-based.
Object-oriented databases
And it's fair to say that the Java collections API and the apache-commons collections API are heavily influenced by Smalltalk.
I wouldn't say that you should learn Smalltalk per se, but a familiarity with the fundamentals of these features (now present in many other languages) is surely advantageous to you.
Note that there are currently only 123 questions on here about the language, which was originally intended as an educational language (i.e. aimed at children) by its creator, Alan Kay. It is not particularly heavily used anymore. That's not to say it isn't used. JPMorgan, for example, has a large exotic derivatives risk-management system written in it.
Smalltalk has many brilliant innovations - things we're all taking for granted today, including:
being the first ever IDE
providing programmatic support for a GUI with a mouse If you learn Smalltalk GUI programming, you really will have understood MVC properly.
being built out of a small number of powerful ideas that work together extremely well
The Smalltalk way isn't to crash out on unexpected behaviour - it's to adapt. If you send a message to an object that doesn't understand it, the debugger comes up and invites you to write that method... so it provides excellent support for incremental development.
The IDE, the app that you're writing and your data are all part of the same system - so you can write your own tools and debug instrumentation far more easily.
The TDD toolset in Smalltalk is still better than any other language (see below).
Squeak Smalltalk has quite a bit of cutting-edge design research:
the morphic UI - you can get familiar with the concept of "liveness"
the seaside web framework - learn what a continuation server is and how it's radically different
Squeak has a strong connection with the OLPC software (one laptop per child) project - and could yet have a big influence on the world.
Find out what a "trait" is...
Play with the radical 3D immersive environment called Open Croquet.
Because Smalltalk is a smaller, simpler and more consistent language, with it's own built-in environment it's a much less confusing place to start teaching OOP. People who go this route end up being better Java, Ruby and C# programmers because they can learn basic OOP without all the messy inconsistencies of mainstream languages.
Some commercial Smalltalks have amazing, multi-node distributed OO database environments. I'm thinking about Gemstone.
Want to know the difference between Model-View-Controller and Model-View-Presenter - look at Dolphin Smalltalk...
The single most important reason to learn Smalltalk today is that extreme programming and scrum both got invented in the Smalltalk community... and the highly interactive style of programming you experience in Smalltalk is simpler, more powerful and direct than anything you can do with Java or C# or Ruby... and you can't really understand how well agile methods can work until you've tried to do extreme programming in Smalltalk. Few other languages (no mainstream ones anyway) have a comparable feature set.
... to really understand what TDD can be you need to use SUnit. JUnit just shows you where your tests failed. SUnit actually allows you click into the debugger at the point where the test failed and see the actual objects and how they're connected so you can see, live in the debugger how the code failed and fix it right there.
Yes, Smalltalk is so important you should study it. Why? You can understand object-oriented programming in pure, simple form. What people forget is that the Smalltalk-80 "Blue Book" has only about 90 pages devoted to the language—the language is just that simple. The other 300 pages talk about the predefined class hierarchy, which is a masterpiece of design for a class-based, object-oriented language that uses single inheritance. You will get a much deeper understanding of objects (e.g., classes are objects, and they have metaclasses, and so on off to infinity... except the knot is carefully tied to keep the system finite) than you would ever get from studying a hybrid language like Java or C++. Smalltalk matters not just because of its history but because of its simplicity:
Simple enough so you can understand the entire language and the libraries
Shows one idea (objects are all you need) pushed to its logical extreme
Everybody has something to learn from Smalltalk!
Smalltalk is one of the first two original OOP languages, the other being Simula-67. Consequently, there are two large families - the statically typed model centered around method invocation, pioneered by Simula (C++, Java, C# all belong here), and the dynamically typed model centered around message passing, pioneered by Smalltalk (Python, Ruby belong here).
Today, Smalltalk isn't particularly important on its own - there are some people still using it to write stuff, but it's definitely not mainstream. Learning it will give you some insight in how and why OOP evolved, however.
I spent about 5 minutes in a presentation at a conference last month on Smalltalk's history and influence. See Image-based development with Smalltalk. One of the more foreign concepts to today's programmers is the "image-based" development. There are some good analogies, including a DBMS and a spreadsheet.
Yes. Download the seaside one-click image, start using it with the tutorial from James Foster and you will learn at least:
how web applications should be build
how debugging is supposed to work
I agree with the others. I'm not sure if it's important per se, but it is COOL (imho).
I love that there are no loops or conditionals in the language. If-then-else is a message sent to a boolean object. Objects of type True do one thing, objects of type False do another. (Yes, True and False are subtypes of Boolean, with a single value each, true and false respectively).
It starts out being kind of counter-intuitive, but it does give you a very interesting, and deep, view of how OO programming should work...
Not only was it one of the first, Smalltalk remains to this day a paragon of OO language design. The more popular languages that came later — C++, Java, even Objective-C — all have more primitive object-orientation and are more restrictive than good old Smalltalk. Smalltalk had pervasive first-class objects, great support for runtime introspection, very natural use of duck typing and closures that worked better than I've seen in any non-functional language. I mean, we're talking about a language that had no native control structures (if, while, etc.) but was able to create them out of its object system in a way that worked seamlessly. How cool is that?
I wouldn't recommend Smalltalk for any intensive desktop app development these days (there just isn't a viable implementation IMO), but if you want to see how OO was meant to be and maybe pick up some ideas you can use in your apps, Smalltalk is a great place to look.
If you only know one object-oriented language you should consider learning a second and a third and a fourth in order to gain a broader perspective on programming with objects. Learning Smalltalk will stretch your brain because a lot of the familiar concepts we're used to in other languages (e.g. if-then-else, for(;;), while(), etc) are not there in Smalltalk. There are equivalents, obviously, but Smalltalk does things differently, and learning about different ways to do things is always a good idea.
Good luck.
I've just started to revive my interest in Smalltalk, and in my opinion, there are a few compelling things that are special about Smalltalk:
Highly productive development
environment
Built-in support for Agile/Extreme
programming methodologies
"Pure" object model
Easy to use graphics framework
None of these make it especially useful for people who are not in the software development business. My first exposure to it was when I saw a user interface for an embedded device prototyped on a PC using Smalltalk. This allowed the user interface to be modified and tested very quickly, and when completed, provided the embedded developers an "executable specification" that was far more precise than any document. I'm surprised I haven't seen this technique used far more often than I've observed in my travels during the last 20 years.
Using Smalltalk as a prototyping tool is where my interest lies: I think that given a new problem, different approaches to solving it can be tried and validated very quickly and easily in a Smalltalk environment, and once the desired solution is found it should be relatively mechanical to convert it to Java/C++/C# etc. etc. In fact, for repetitive sorts of things, it might well be possible to use Smalltalk to generate code for parts of the solution in some other target language.
The other thing about SmallTalk is that its alumni include Kent Beck and Ward Cunningham. Their work with SmallTalk spawned automated xUnit testing, software design patterns, CRC Cards and other practices which ed into XP/Agile, etc. So it could be argued that SmallTalk has been a major contributor to the modern programming landscape.
Just two comments:
Smalltalk is not object "oriented", is real objects, only objects and messages in the environment.
Smalltalk is not a language, is an environment that has a language (of the same name), but most of the "magic" here is thanks to the environment (the image).
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
I already have a few languages under my belt (in a rough order of expertise): Python, C, C++, PHP, Javascript, Haskell, Java, MIPS, x86 assembler. But it's been almost 2 years since I learned a new one, and I'm starting to get the itch. I have a few criteria:
Must (repeat: must) have a free Linux implementation
Should be different from the languages I already know. In other words, it should have features that get me thinking about solving problems in a new way.
Should have some potential for practical use. It doesn't need to be the next Java, but this rules out Brainf* and Shakespeare :) I don't really care how many job postings does it have, but real-world apps and libraries are a plus.
Should have at least just enough free learning materials to get me started in it.
I was thinking Lisp (CL? something else?) or OCaml. I already have some experience with functional languages with Haskell (yes I know that Lisp/OCaml are multi-paradigm). I'm not an expert - e.g. parts of code from Real World Haskell can still contort my brain, but I understand the basic concepts and some advanced ones (functors, monads).
Which one to choose? Any other languages that I have overlooked? Also, could you please include some useful links to good books/tutorials etc.
Neither Lisp nor OCaml is super far afield from what you already know. Here are four suggestions chosen partly for intrinsic interest and partly to stretch your horizons.
A logic programming language, probably Prolog. I haven't found good materials online, but the book The Art of Prolog by Sterling and Shapiro is excellent. The more basic textbook by Clocksin and Mellish is also good. The main point of interest is programming with relations, not functions.
A pure object-oriented language, either
Smalltalk or Self. If you've only used hybrid object-oriented languages you'll be amazed how beautiful pure object-orientation can be. I've linked to the Squeak implementation of Smalltalk. I personally would recommend learning Smalltalk before tackling Self; there's a very large and active community and the software is well developed. Self stands on Smalltalk's shoulders and is an even more inspiring design, but the community is much smaller. For those who have access to the ACM Digital library I recommend the excellent talk by Dave Ungar at HOPL-III; the paper is also pretty good.
The Icon programming language has two great things going for it; a powerful and unusual evaluation model with implicit backtracking, and a user-extensible model of string processing that beats regular expressions all hollow. I'm sorry to say that Icon has never quite kept pace with the times, and of all my recommendations it is the least practical. In fact I fear the language is moribund. But it will stretch your mind almost as much as Haskell, and in wildly different directions. Icon is still very useful for string-processing tasks of modest size.
You can read about Icon string processing in an article by Ralph Griswold from Computer Journal.
The Lua programming language is my last and least radical suggestion. Its interest is not so much in novel language features or paradigms but in the superb engineering of the language and its implementation. Lua occupies a number of niches, including scripting, gaming, string processing, and lightweight functional programming. But its main point of interest is its seamless integration with C, and to get the full benefit, you should bind a C library into Lua.
The HOPL-III web site also contains an excellent talk and paper about Lua.
Both Common Lisp and Ocaml are certainly useful to learn. If you already know Haskell, CL might be the more different experience.
SBCL and Clozure CL are both very useful implementations of Common Lisp on Linux. (Overview about various implementations: Common Lisp survey.)
As a starting point I would recommend to use Peter Seibel's excellent book Practical Common Lisp, that is both available online and printed.
Community pointers are here: CLIKI.
Prolog may be what you are looking for.
Edit
The first commenter is right, my answer was pretty short and not very useful, so:
My preferred implementation is SWI-Prolog. I personally learned from Prolog Programming for Artificial Intelligence. It's style is pretty clear and it contains many examples, but I don't own any other book on logic programming (it's a shame, really :) so I have no basis for comparison.
Erlang is pretty interesting to learn because of its super efficient concurrency model, and the ease with which you can write distributed systems (for an example of this, CouchDB was written in Erlang). It's a dynamically typed functional language, but you can also write code in a procedural fashion. The tutorial I learned it with is called "Getting Started with Erlang", which covers just about every part of the language.
If you want to make use of your Java and functional programming knowledge, and you want to learn a Lisp, then try Clojure.
The implementation is free and cross-platform including Linux, because it runs on the JVM. Being a Lisp, it's different enough (in useful and wonderful ways) from most other languages to make things interesting. Some features such as immutable data structures, multimethods, metadata support, focus on safe concurrency, etc. are fairly novel compared to the languages you listed. Clojure is geared heavily toward being a practical and useful language rather than an academic one. It's a functional language but not "pure", which is arguably a good thing. You can also trivially make use of any Java library from within Clojure.
Clojure is a new language, so the only book out so far is Programming Clojure, but it's a pretty good one. There's also a wiki which may not be entirely up-to-date, because the language is still evolving very quickly. The mailing list and IRC channel are very friendly, welcoming places to ask questions. The official website is also a good resource, of course.
I'm going to recommend something that I haven't yet tried, but plan to, so you have to judge for yourself this one. There's this language, called IO, which is particular in that its prototype-based, like JavaScript, but also borrows concepts from many other languages. Its job market it's probably nonexistent, but I thought I mention this language.
Otherwise, a language from the Lisp family may be pretty different from what you already know. In that regard I'd recommend Scheme, which is, in my opinion, more elegant than Common Lisp. The new concept that you might found interesting in Scheme is continuations.
If you take the Scheme path, make some time to watch these videos from 1986. They're amazing.
Have a look at Smalltalk ! Either Cincom VWST or Smalltalk/X - dont bother with Squeak as the interface is terrible). VAST is good also but really only Windows centric. And dont bother about the sceptics that pore scorn on Smalltalk -- they arent using it and are stuck in the morass of edit-run-debug cycle languages and multiple dispirt linked libraries. :-)
Why these Smalltalks - well, they come complete wth excellent IDE, GUI tools builtin, best debugger you will ever see, online help, and is totally independent of the underlying OS. Eg a ST/X programming running under Linux can be transfered ( source code) to Windows ST/X and it should execute.
ST/X is free with only a very minor licience restrictions, Cincom offer a free NC ( Not Commercial ) version that is NOT restricted. I use ST/X as I prefer the default look & feel
it offers. Their IDE interfaces are very similar.
Languages without a IDE & GUI tools are just wasting your time as the world is really GUI, no matter how terrific the underlying language is. Eg Ruby is great, but with no IDE or easy GUI tools its really frustrating.
Smalltalk is not easy to get into, and its not perfect,(what language is?) but very satisfying to learn & use. And now that the hardware and operating systems have finally caught up with Smalltalks needs . very efficient.
I second Rainer's Common Lisp recommendation.
CL has all the things you're looking for and will provide a genuinely novel experience that will also make your coding efforts and approaches in other languages better.
But bring patience and persistence, you will have to grasp a lot of concepts that will seem alien at first.
You could try Tcl. It was sufficiently different to provoke an adverse reaction in my brain, so I can't really tell you how I found it different, but there's been a lot of good stuff written in it (maybe less nowadays than earlier).
C# has a free implementation in Linux under the Mono project, and it arguably is a very marketable skill unless you're completely anti-Microsoft.
My favorite C# book is Pro C# 2008 and the .NET 3.5 Platform, Fourth Edition.
If you're really want exotic, F# is an OCaml style language that runs on the .NET platform and mono, and is getting a lot of attention these days.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/fsharp/default.aspx
Books for F#:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=f%23
Of the suggestions I've seen so far, I like Lisp (see Secko) and Smalltalk (see brett), as both will give you another view of languages. Prolog even more so.
Another language that is different is Erlang -- I haven't had a chance to learn it yet, but it handles concurrency in a different way. The best link I can give you is the main website.
In terms of recommendations, Lisp is good both because it is currently used and because it is very old. The others you will have to look at sources and see which one appeals the most.
Try FORTRAN, then? I hear it's still actively used by the scientific and mathemematical communities, plus it should be dissimilar enough to be a learning challenge.
Compilers:
http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GFortranBinaries
http://www.g95.org/
http://www.fortran.com/compilers.html
http://www.thefreecountry.com/compilers/fortran.shtml
IDEs:
http://www.eclipse.org/photran/
http://force.lepsch.com/ (FORTRAN 77 only)
Tutorials:
Introduction to Modern FORTRAN: http://www-uxsup.csx.cam.ac.uk/courses/Fortran/
FORTRAN 90 Tutorial: http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~shene/COURSES/cs201/NOTES/fortran.html
You could also learn Visual Basic.NET, in case you ever get forced to maintain that. Evidently mono has a working Linux implementation of it:
http://www.mono-project.com/Visual_Basic
Factor is pretty radically different from everything you said you know, and also everything else listed. It's stack-based, like Forth, but has a fairly comprehensive library and a lot of interesting features.
Ada is very practical -- there's a compiler based on gcc -- but also quite different from the other imperative languages you know. I find the type system a bit stifling, but it was worth learning something about.
Lisp is a great HLL, it has everything that other languages lack. In my opinion, this is a very good language that can "satisfy" any programmers needs.
Perl is also a HLL like Lisp, it's interesting and fun at the same time. It derives from C so you can pick it up as you go. It can be hard sometimes and some people tend to get lost while learning, but it's worth knowing.
Both languages are free of use and come with Linux.
Links
Lisp:
If Lisp is so great,
An Introduction and Tutorial for Common Lisp
Perl:
PERL -- Practical Extraction and Report Language
Books
On Lisp - Great book by Paul Graham on the Lisp language. It's free and you can download it here.
Scala has been very good for making me see programming in a new light. I haven't used it for anything worklike yet, but it's still affected how I write code in other languages - not just Java, but PHP. I recently wrote a simple parser for a WordPress plugin, and the code is vastly more functional and immutable than it would have been six months ago, and better for it, despite the lack of enforcement in PHP.
The only other language to have affected the way I work so dramatically is Perl, nearly a decade earlier. Perl has contributed a lot to the way I pseudo-code, even if I never touch the language itself.
Many people compare the functional aspects of Scala to Haskell. You may even imagine that knowing Haskell means you already know all Scala could teach you, but I don't believe that. The way Scala combines OO and function has a way of making it seem like that's actually the truest form of both of them.
Like you, I have over a dozen languages under my belt. While shopping for something to play with for writing a cross-compiler, I ran across ML and family. Many very good ideas there, and they have taught me to write code is a much different way; for example, my JavaScript now has a decidedly functional bent.
After toying with OCaml under Windows a while (and getting frustrated with stability issues), I ran across F#, an offspring of OCaml. The two are quite similar (can cross-compile a lot of code), but OCaml apparently has a really good macro system (P4) and type-classes (in support of writing "strongly typed" operators against generic types), while F# has excellent support for asynchronous and parallel operations, monads, units-of-measure for numeric types, as well as cleaner OO syntax and awesome IDE integration (VS2008 & will be released in-the-box with VS2010). I much prefer F# these days, since I have access to the whole .NET runtime and loads of 3rd party libraries. In fact, I write most of my one-off and utility code in F# now; for me, its generally much more productive than C++, JavaScript, C#, PowerShell, or anything else.
F# works fairly well under Mono on Linux, and has a good following there. The compiler and runtime will be open sourced once stable (released with VS2010), and the developers consider Mono support enough of a priority for it to be seriously considered for non-Microsoft use.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
I have read numerous time that learning a language such as Haskell, Lisp or Smalltalk will somehow make you a better programmer while you program in other languages.
Is there more than just anecdotal evidence for that claim?
Or is it just the way people rationalize having spend a lot of time learning a programming language that they will never use?
IMHO, it is all about learning a new programming paradigm. If you know Java and then C#, there's not much gain, once both of them have almost the same "type of programming".
But if you get to learn a functional language or dynamic, for instance, you're forced to think another way, and that will probably help you to program better in your favorite language.
It is something like: "It is so easy doing this in {different language you learned}. There must be a better way to do this in {language you already know}". And then you rethink, and build up a more elegant way to do this in {language you already know}.
I don't have any hard evidence, but I have really appreciated the different way of looking at problems that I have since learning lisp (the same goes for python and c).
The key isn't necessarily learning different languages though, I believe that the key is actually the different viewpoints that you gain by learning different programming styles.
Good examples are functional, imperative, object-oriented, etc. Also, there are common design differences is interpreted vs compiled languages; static vs dynamic typing, etc.
Although most people do a majority of their programming using a single style (most commonly OOP over the past few years), I think that all programmers should know multiple styles so that they are better able to see the shortfalls of their own style.
Can't shed much light on this in terms of programming languages, but it seems very similar to the "why learn a dead language?" argument that surrounds Latin, and much of the reasoning there can be applied here.
Programming is a way of thinking, not writing code in programming language X: that is "coding", not "programming".
By knowing at least something about more than just one programming language - preferably across different paradigms, so imperative/OOP/functional/logical - you train that way of thinking about problems outside the context of the specific details and quirks of language X.
I think this always improves your abilities to be(come) a better programmer tremendously.
A great side-effect of learning new languages is the potential for application in your existing language.
For instance, I'm a Java programmer and I took the time to learn my first functional language (Haskell). I was recently asked to learn Scala for an upcoming project. This is extremely easy since I understand the comcepts of guards, recursion, etc. from Haskell.
Deeply learning language just for learning language has too little benefits. If you have a lot of tasks and you don't know language that ideal for solving it then it is make sense to learn that language. Otherwise it is make sense to spend the time to become expert in languages you already know.
I don't know that there will have been much rigorous study regarding the benefits of multi-programming language exposure on overall programming ability, but I would argue that the studies regarding why learning a foreign human language (which you may never use in practice) is beneficial would in general hold equally well for studying foreign programming languages. The benefits ascribed often include improved cognitive abilities as well as improved understanding of one's native language.
here's some links to studies
anecdotally, I complained a great deal about taking COBOL, and have never really used it but was able to apply things I learned in that class at my first job.
If you give any credence to the Pragmatic Programming guys, consider their advice from page 14 of their first book:
Learn at least one new language every year. Different languages
solve the same problems in different ways. By learning several
different approaches, you can help broaden your thinking and avoid
getting stuck in a rut.
Some examples that come to mind:
Knowing C and having to deal with memory management and do-it-yourself data structures can help you understand performance issues when programming in a higher level language where those details are hidden from you.
Conversely, learning an OO language can affect your C programming - with, for example, the concept of Polymorphism prompting you to use function pointers in ways you might not have otherwise.
Learning a language where functions are first class objects that can be passed around can make you think of similar techniques in other languages, even if, in those other languages, you have to make the functions methods in objects that get passed around.
Learning about the way Erlang handles concurrency can make you rethink how much shared state you use between threads in other languages.
Any language that has a built-in feature you find useful can prompt you to implement your own version of that feature in another language that doesn't have it, and thus allow you to solve problems in ways you might not have thought of if you hadn't been exposed to the feature in the language that has it built-in.
Learning about Interfaces in Java can make you think about the benefits of precisely specifying your (small "i") interfaces in other languages that don't have them as a formal construct in a type system.
No doubt there are others.
Learning a language is not a binary event. If you are a decent programmer, you should be able to trust your own instincts as to whether a language offers you a new take on your craft.
Virtually every language worth considering these days can be downloaded and test-driven in a couple of minutes. So do it -- pick one and try it out.
There are a limited number of cases where this "laissez-faire" approach falls short. If you're a complete beginner, of course it doesn't work. When I first learned C, I had to have it beaten into me, but it did turn out to be worth it because it made me understand pointers, memory reference and dynamic allocation in a way I hadn't previously.
But if you know that much already, just poke around and look for a language that makes your lightbulb go on.
Different languages have different ways of implementing the same ideas. By learning new languages, you get a different perspective on how things can be accomplished, and can then use that knowledge to approach how you program in your current environment. Think about object oriented and functional programming. OO Programmers can learn a lot about parrellization from languages like C.
Learning a language, especially one that practices a new paradigm, is very beneficial for every programmer. For example learning Scheme will help someone understand functional programming. The programmer can later practice what he/she learned with other languages like C#. She can think of new ways of doing things.
Also, as languages evolve, it's high likely that the language you use will adopt some features of other languages. Having taught myself Ruby, I was able to grasp the changes in C# 3.0 much easier.
I think learning languages will always benefit you even if you don't use them again. I started playing with Ioke as an attempt to learn something experimental and because of it my JavaScript has improved because certain ideas have been cemented.
learning a new language will possibly give you new insights that you will try translate to your main language.
I don't think there will be any hard evidence--I think this is more of an intuitive thing. Learning a totally different language will help you look at things totally different. Or maybe it won't. In any case, what's the harm in learning something?
It's entirely subjective, but way back when, after taking an undergraduate course in Haskell, I did notice that my programming style in C became more 'Haskell-like' for a while; I used a lot of simple, recursive functions. I also noticed that this programming style seemed to yield some of the same benefits programming in Haskell had; bugs were fewer, code was easier to understand (albeit slower).
So, while learning another programming language may not make everyone a better programmer, it definitely was a learning experience for me, personally.
What are the benefits of learning mathematics or physics that you won't use, or the benefits of studying philosophy or dead tongues?
It's the intellectual achievement and the enlightenment what matters, you will be a wiser person with any new thing that you learn, no matter if they are programming languages, literature, role playing games... of course if it's related to your working field, then you'll actually find a use, sooner or later :-)
I spent some time studying clojure even though I knew I wouldn't use it in the near-term (mostly because I can't really deploy on the JVM).
It has concepts that aren't supported by the languages I use (C#/C/C++/Python/Perl) and I wanted to know what I was missing and also if it would be worth looking into libraries that purport to add these features.
Specifically, I'm very interested in understanding Lisp-style macros and the direct concurrency support. I also spent some time reading the implementation, specifically the datastructures, which was very educational -- good to see a quality implementation of persistent datastructures to learn how they work (and give you immutability without sacrificing much performance).
Bryond what has already been said, I really like new languages just because it can bring new interest to programming. You learn different ways to approach problems and the strengths/weaknesses of certain languages. It is something new to learn and any good programmer should be striving to always be learning new things. It mixes up your daily routine of possibly programming in the same language for years.
I also like what everyone has said about programming perspective.
Some good points have been made.
I would add that learning languages you won't use in production work can be of value
To better appreciate and absorb the arguments and methods in texts and papers that will improve programming ability in languages I do use for production work (e.g. MIX/MMIX for Knuth's Art of Computer Programming; RATFOR for Kernighan and Plauger's Software Tools; I still use some ALGOL-based syntax for some pseudocode although I never wrote runnable code in ALGOL outside University)
To be able to check or prototype programs that will be written in a different language (e.g. some routines for numerical computing in C can be quickly checked or scaled using languages that have appropriate functionality built in such as Fortran, Python or Haskell)
Learning a new language can give insight as to how it could be used to more easily solve problems that were put to one side because of time or complexity constraints.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
Have you ever tried learning a language while on a project? I have, and from my personal experience I can say that it takes courage, effort, time, thinking, lots of caffeine and no sleep. Sometimes this has to be done without choice, other times you choose to do it; if you are working on a personal project for example.
What I normally do in this kind of situation, and I believe everyone does, is "build" on top of my current knowledge of languages, structures, syntax and logic. What I find difficult to cope with, is the difference of integrity in some cases. Some languages offer a good background for future learning and "language study", they pose as a good source of information or a frame of reference and can give a "firm" grasp of what's to come. Other languages form or introduce a new way of thinking and are harder to get used to.
Sometimes you unintentionally think in a specific language and when introduced to a new way of thinking, a new language, can cause confusion or make you get lost between the "borders" of your new and your current knowledge of languages.
What can be a good solution in this case? What should be used to broaden the knowledge of the new language, a new way of thinking, and maintain or incorporate the current knowledge of other languages inside the "borders" of the new language?
I find I need to do a project to properly learn a language, but those can be personal projects. When I learned Python on the job, I first expected (and found) a significant slowdown in my productivity for a while. I read the standard tutorials, coding standards and I lurked on the Python list for a while, which gave me a much better idea of the best practices of the language.
Doing things like coding dojos and stuff when learning a language can help you get a feel for things. I just recently changed jobs and went back to Java, and I spent some time working on toy programs just to get back in the feel for things (I'm also reading Effective Java, 2nd edition as my previous major experience had been with Java 1.4).
I think, in some respects no matter what the impetus for learning the language, you have to start by imitating good patterns in the new language. Whether that means finding a good book, with excellent code examples, good on-line tutorials, or following the lead of a more experienced developer, you have to absorb what it means to write good code in a particular language first. Once you have developed a level of comfort, you can start branching out and and experimenting with alternatives to the patterns that you've learned, looking for ways to apply things you've learned from other languages, but keeping within the "rules" of the language. Eventually, you'll get to the point where you know you can 'break the rules" that you learned earlier because you have enough experience to know when they do/don't apply.
My personal preference, even when forced to learn a new language, is to start with some throw away code. Even starting from good tutorials, you'll undoubtedly write code that later you will look back on and not understand how stupid you could have been. I prefer, if possible, to write as my first foray into a language code that will be thrown away and not come back to haunt me later. The alternative is to spend a lot of time refactoring as you learn more and more. Eventually, you'll end up doing this, too.
I would like to mention ALT.NET here
Self-organizing, ad-hoc community of developers bound by a desire to improve ourselves, challenge assumptions, and help each other pursue excellence in the practice of software development.
So in the spirit of ALT.NET, it is challenging but useful to reach out of your comfort zone to learn new languages. Some things that really helped me are as follows:
Understand the history behind a language or script. Knowing evolution helps a lot.
Pick the right book. Research StackOverflow and Amazon.com to find the right book to help you ease the growing pains.
OOP is fairly common in most of the mature languages, so you can skip many of the chapters related to OOP in many books. Syntax learning will be a gradual process. I commonly bookmark some quick handy guides for that.
Read as many community forums as possible to understand the common pitfalls of the new language.
Attend some local meetups to interact with the community and share your pains.
Take one pitch at a time by building small not so complicated applications and thereby gaining momentum.
Make sure you create a reference frame for what you need to learn. Things like how security, logging, multithreading are handled.
Be Open minded, you can be critical, but if you hate something then do not learn that language.
Finally, I think it is worthwhile to learn one strong languages like C# or Java, one functional language and one scripting language like ruby or python.
These things helped me tremendously and I think will help all software engineers and architects to really gear for any development environment.
I learned PHP after I was hired to be the project lead on the Zend Framework project.
It helped that I had 20 years of professional programming background, and good knowledge of C, Java, Perl, JavaScript, SQL, etc. I've also gravitated towards dynamic scripting languages for most of my career. I've written applications in awk, frameworks in shell, macro packages in troff, I even wrote a forum using only sed.
Things to help learn a language on the job:
Reading code and documentation.
Listening to mailing lists and blogs of the community.
Talking to experts in the language, fortunately several of whom were my immediate teammates.
Writing practice code, and asked for code reviews and coaching.(Zend_Console_Getopt was my first significant PHP contribution).
Learning the tools that go along with the language. PHPUnit, Xdebug, phpDoc, phing, etc.
Of course I did apply what I knew from other programming languages. Many computer science concepts are language-universal. The differences of a given language are often simply idiomatic, a way of stating something that can be done another way in another language. This is especially true for languages like Perl or PHP, which both borrow a lot of idioms from earlier languages.
It also helped that I took courses in Compiler Design in college. Having a good foundation in how languages are constructed makes it easier to pick up new languages. At some level, they're all just ways of abstracting runtime stacks and object references.
If you're a junior member of the team and don't know the language, this is not necessarily an issue at all. As long as there is some code review and supervision, you can be a productive.
Language syntax is one issue, but architectural differences are a more important concern. Many languages are also development platforms, and if you don't have experience with the platform, you don't know how to create a viable solution architecture. So if you're the project lead or working solo, you'd better have some experience on the platform before you do your design work.
For example, I would say an experienced C# coder with no VB experience would probably survive a VB.NET project just fine. In fact, it would be more difficult for a developer who only had experience in C#/ASP.NET to complete a C# WPF project than a VB ASP.NET project. An experienced PHP developer might hesitate a bit on a ColdFusion project, but they probably won't make any serious blunders because they are familiar with a script based web development architecture.
Many concepts, such as object modelling and database query strategies, translate just fine between languages. But there is always a learning curve for a new platform, and sometimes it can be quite nasty. The worst case is that the project must be thrown out because the architure is too wrong to refactor.
I like to learn a new language while working on a project, because a real project will usually force me to learn aspects of the language that I might otherwise skip. One of the first things I like to to is read code in that language, and jump in. I find resources (such as books and various internet sites) to help as I go along.
Then, after I've been working on it for a while, I like to read (or re-read) books or other resources on the language. By this time I have some knowledge, so this will help solidify some things and also point out areas where I am flat-out wrong in my understanding. For instance, I can see that I was making incorrect assumptions about similarities between languages.
This also applies to tools -- after using a tool for a while and learning the basics, reading (or skimming) the documentation can teach me a lot.
In my opinion, you should try to avoid that. I know, most of the times you can't but in any case try not to mix the new language with the old one, and never add to the mixture old habits, practices and patterns.
Always try to find resources that will help you get through the new language in the way the language works, not in the way other languages do; that will never have a happy ending, and if it does it will be very hard to modify it to the right way.
Cheers.
Yes I have.
I mean, is there another way? The only language I ever learned that was not on a project was ABC basic, which was what you used on my first computer.
I would recommend if you start with a certain language, stick with it. I only say that because many times in the past I tried more and more different ones, and the one I started out with was the best :D
Everytime I have/want to learn a new language, I force myself to find something to code.
But to be sure I did it well, I always want to be able to check my code and what it ouputs.
To do so, I just try to do the same kind of stuff with languages I know and to compare the outputs. For that, I created a little project (hosted on Github) with an exercise sheet and the correction for every language I learnt. It's a good way to learn in my opinion because it gives you a real little project.