Is C++ (one of) the best language to learn at first

Question

C++ is one of the most used programming language in the world since like 25+ years.

My first job as programmer was in C++ and I coded in C++ everyday for nearly 4 years. Now I do mostly PHP, but I will forever cherish this C++ background.

C++ has helped me understand many "under the hood" features/behaviors/restrictions of many other (and different) programming languages like PHP and Delphi.

I'm a full time programmer for 6+ years now and since I have a quite varied programming background I often get questions by "newbies" as where to start to become a "good" programmer.

I think C++ is one of the best language to start with because it gives you a real usefull experience that will last and will teach you how things work under the hood. It's not the easier one to learn for a newbie, but in my opinion it's one that will reward in the long term. I would like to know your opinion on this matter to add to my arguments when I guide "newbies".

After this introduction, here's my question :

Is C++ (one of) the best language to learn at first for you.

Since it's subjective, I've marked this question as community wiki.

EDIT: This question is not about why Java (or C# or any other language) is better than C++ to start with, it's about what's make C++ a good choice or not a good choice to learn as one of your firsts languages. For example, for me C++ made me understand how the memory works. Now today in many languages everything is managed by the garbadge collector and some people don't even know that. I'm glad I know how it works underneath and I think it can help you to write better code.

Answer 1

I like C++ but I'd never recomend it as a first language.

As others have suggested C++'s complexity makes it unsuitable for a first language, beginners don't need to worry about backward compatability.

Once you have some programming experience under your belt then there are things C++ can teach you.

• low level stuff - memory and pointers and RAII oh my!
• highlevel stuff - templates, generic programming and meta-programming

and looking to the future the good stuff seems to keep comming (c++0x rvalue refs, variadic templates, user defined literals). for a language of its age it is pretty progressive in looking at new concepts, in comparison some much newer languages have virtually no core language change.

Answer 2

Well, it's not for me. By far the best language I've ever taught is Python. C is of course the best I've ever learnt but I come from a time when dinosaurs roamed the earth :-).

The learning curve there for students to get a program running and understood is far less than with any other language I've tried (including C++).

Answer 3

As jk has pointed out I also wouldn't recommend c++ as a first language, but for sure I would recommend it at some point in order to familiarize with HW architecture.

Using c++ helps to understand how program is executed and thus write more CPU/memory friendly SW or understand why some things happen.

Answer 4

I attended two colleges in the course of getting my degree. One utilized Java and the other C++. While I'm not extremely fond of either language, Java was much easier to pick up than C++. The school that taught with C++ also introduced Perl to me, which was my favorite of the three.

Answer 5

In my opinion, C++ is NOT a good first language.

You are exposed to way too much at first. Pointers? Memory Management? Templates? Classes? Compiler errors (as opposed to scripting)? AAAAGGGGHHHHH! Way too much to confuse and discourage beginners.

I'd much recommend another language without all this stuff going on.

• C might work, you still learn the low level pointer and memory stuff, but you get to skip OOP, templates, etc. I'd stil have a hard time recommending C though (it was my 2nd language in college courses, about 5th overall)
• Java gives you OOP, but saves you from the black hole that is memory management. Lot's of prebuilt classes and libraries so you don't reinvent the wheel too.
• Python gives you quick feedback since it's interpreted. A lot less complicated stuff going on at first too (but it's there later when you get better)

It's not that C++ is a bad language, the learning curve is just too steep for a first language.

Answer 6

My first programming language was Pascal. It was the first programming course taught at the school I was attending, and their second course introduced more advanced programming, in C++. In that first course (Turbo Pascal back then, as Windows 95 had only just been released), we were taught the bare basics: variables, functions (and procedures, as Pascal makes the distinction far more verbosely), etc. I have since thought Pascal to be a very suitable language to learn these basics, due to it's fairly verbose syntax. It has its quirks and imperfections, but in the end I am glad they taught us this way. Nowadays I guess Object Pascal might be a worthy successor.

Other than that, I personally wouldn't keep C or C++ too far away from students. I really liked starting off with Pascal and moving on to C++.

Answer 7

Your "question" (which doesn't contain a single question mark!) is full of non sequiturs.

C++ is one of the most used programming language in the world since like 25+ years.

I'm not sure what relevance popularity has. McDonald's is one of the most popular restaurants, but I'd never recommend it to someone looking to eat out for the first time. I wouldn't recommend "pop" music to anyone wanting to learn about music.

I think C++ is one of the best language to start with because it gives you a real usefull (sic) experience that will last

I can't tell what this means. Are other languages not "real"? not "useful"? not "experiences"? don't "last"?

and will teach you how things work under the hood.

Kind of. It will teach you how things work at the level of C++. Whether that's useful really depends on whether you're a C++ programmer. How many C++ programmers do you know who can describe the implementation of new/delete?

If you really want to learn how things work, I don't see how you can avoid going down to at least the level of assembly language and syscalls.

C++ has helped me understand many "under the hood" features/behaviors/restrictions of many other (and different) programming languages like PHP and Delphi.

Ignoring the issue that these languages aren't all that different, you've offered nothing to suggest that C++ is in any way unique here. Couldn't C have offered the same benefit? Or Fortran? Or Algol? To claim that C++ is the "best" is to claim that others are worse, and you've not addressed any other language, nor any unique feature of C++.

For example, for me C++ made me understand how the memory works. Now today in many languages everything is managed by the garbadge collector and some people don't even know that. I'm glad I know how it works underneath and I think it can help you to write better code.

If you understand the design and implementation of new/delete/malloc/free, you're probably a 99th percentile C++ programmer. Almost all of the ones I've met (or interviewed) assume that new is an atomic O(1) operation. Or that new/delete (and malloc/free) are the only way to allocate memory, and don't know about obstacks, or various GC strategies, or how threading and memory allocation interact. But by the time you learn "how the memory works", you've had to go way past C++. No one language can teach you everything you need to know about any one subject, and I still see no evidence that any one is better to learn first.

Answer 8

I don't really think there's so much an issue with the concepts that C++ exposes you to. These are all important concepts; they have to be learned, and in my opinion it's best not to go along sugar-coating them for too long.

About thirteen years ago, I tried to learn C++ as a second language (after QBASIC). I failed, miserably, but the primary reason for my failure was not the concepts involved in C++, but the unfriendliness of the environment. In order to see your C++ program run at all, it has to be completely syntactically correct to even compile, and it has to avoid segfaulting right off the bat due to some silly oversight. And when you are unable to satisfy these requirements, the diagnostics provided are monumentally unhelpful for a novice trying to learn a programming language on their own.

The most important part of the learning process when you are self-teaching is trial and error. In C++ (and C, and largely Java too) if you make an error, you can't even get to the trial part. I remember many times having a small C++ program that worked, and trying to make some tiny change, addition, or improvement to it, only to wind up with a handful of syntax mistakes that caused the compiler to barf out a cascade of a dozen errors and perhaps a hundred warnings. Being a complete novice, of course, I had no way to distinguish which of these pointed to the real problem to give me even the most vague indication of what I did wrong. Normally, at that point, I just had to start over (since of course I knew nothing of version control either!).

Eventually, I abandoned C++ for a year or so and programmed in Visual Basic instead. While I would never recommend VB to a new programmer these days, its advantages for me were that it was very forgiving and allowed me to try things out and see what I did wrong without having my program be an all-or-nothing affair. Later, when I came back to C++ with some additional knowledge of how to interpret errors, and of programming in general, it was much more accessible.

So in short, I'd recommend starting with a language that allows a rapid trial-and-error cycle, has a somewhat forgiving syntax, and provides relatively friendly diagnostics. These days, I think the best candidate for that is Python. It's certainly not C, C++, or Java, although these are all languages that are worthwhile to learn eventually.

On the other hand, it's not unreasonable for C++ to be a first language if it is taught as part of a course where the student has access to a instructor or TA to help them understand what the compiler is trying to tell them.

Answer 9

I think the best programming language to begin learning must be general and very high level. This way it can be better learnt the essence of programming. Maybe Python is one of the best, I think.

Answer 10

In my view starting with a high level scripting language is the best approach. When starting with lower level languages there is a tendancy to spend too much time dotting i's and crossing t's rather than a singular focus on application design. If you end up writing lousy code that can be fixed incrementally. If you end up with a lousy design its a much more difficult problem to address.

In my view problem solving and domain knowledge are the only skills that matter. Languages and their assorted decorations and features are a commodity and should be treated as such.

Answer 11

C++ is a complex language, and as such you have to start with some subset of the functionality. The common case is starting with the C subset of the language (which is not really C, but there are very few differences). Now, some authors as Koening in Accelerated C++, consider that some of the features in the C subset are not necessarily a good start point.

In that particular book, there is not even a mention to pointers in more than half of the book. It starts with the STL, operations on strings, vectors, ... first with plain functions, then it adds classes and builds on concepts that are harder to grasp.

I don't think that approach to be any more complex than the way I learned Pascal, or how Java is presented in my University to students nowadays. Then again, I have read that book after already knowing how to program, so I might be biased and maybe it is harder than I think...

Answer 12

I believe C++ is a fine first language.

It has concepts of:

• memory
• typing
• objects
• inheritance
• functions
• iterators
• strings
• compilation
• arrays
• containers
• bit-operations

It has libraries for DB access and threading.

It is not easy, but it gets the needed information(both high-level and low-level) into you. It is imperative that a competent programmer know everything from malloc to database access. It presents most concepts in first principle forms, instead of papering over the leaky abstractions. C++ has volumes of information written about it; some of it is even good information. :-)

Its primary power downfall is a lack of closures and first-order functions. Everything else, it has.

C++ has a simple enough start point that complexity can be managed and ramped up from the teacher's standpoint.

Forcing yourself to understand - really understand memory - is required to program at the maximum level of skill. Why defer that?

Yes, C++ is hard. But - programming a real computer is hard. The typical C++ complaints simply expose the essential difficulties of programming a real computer(memory, resources).

There are other good first languages, but I consider C++ to be one of the best due to its depth of expression, combined with its nearness to the 'metal'.

Answer 13

I think that C++ makes a wonderful first programming language. An instructor doesn't have to introduce classes until he's ready. He also doesn't have to introduce the whole idea of references (as implemented in most OO languages) until he's ready, and when you do implement those, it's very explicit when you're using them and how they work. You want arrays? Introduce a bounds-checked vector class.

Answer 14

As recommended in this article by Peter Norvig which was voted as the best programming article in this thread:

Given these criteria, my recommendations for a first programming language would be Python or Scheme. But your circumstances may vary, and there are other good choices. If your age is a single-digit, you might prefer Alice or Squeak (older learners might also enjoy these). The important thing is that you choose and get started.

Answer 15

I also would not recommend C++.

I think Java is easy to study, rather than C++.

Answer 16

Just found an article that represent what I'm thinking...

I am actually physically disgusted that so many computer science programs think that Java is a good introductory language, because it's "easy" and you don't get confused with all that boring string/malloc stuff but you can learn cool OOP stuff which will make your big programs ever so modular. This is a pedagogical disaster waiting to happen. Generations of graduates are descending on us and creating Shlemiel The Painter algorithms right and left and they don't even realize it, since they fundamentally have no idea that strings are, at a very deep level, difficult, even if you can't quite see that in your perl script. If you want to teach somebody something well, you have to start at the very lowest level. It's like Karate Kid. Wax On, Wax Off. Wax On, Wax Off. Do that for three weeks. Then Knocking The Other Kid's Head off is easy.

From Joel on Software Back to Basics.

Answer 17

My assertion is that writing good code comes from good design. You can learn strong OO analysis and design principles in a language agnostic environment. If you are using Java, C++, or anything else to learn object-oriented principles, you are making a mistake. If you are using Java and C++ to apply said principles, you are well on your way.

With that being said, I recommend C to everybody that asks me. You will learn about lower level things like memory management and how/why to write efficient code, why strings are hard (since you'll be using char[] arrays) and how to write functional code while having the world of OO hidden from you. For me, C is still my base language... I think in C.

Object oriented analysis and design is largely language agnostic. You're almost better off learning about OO separately from any specific language. When you understand the concepts,the principles, and the purpose, you can then learn how to apply them in different languages, as syntax and implementation across different languages may vary. Your time with C will give you an appreciation and an understanding for what is happening under the hood.