willing to try it out

i did a bit of programming back in HS and i wanted to get back into it again i found getting the computer to do something was a bit tough and i liked the challenge. i was wondering what programming language should i pick up? + for someone that posts reference material along with it

thank you anon

Pascal.

Python or Ruby. Don't worry about fags who heavily advocate something needlessly hard and convoluted (assembly, C++, haskell, scheme, lisp) for nerd cred. As an absolute beginner with almost no programming experience you don't need to be anywhere near that shit at the moment. Don't be ashamed of getting some quick-and-easy library for immediate results. PyGame is excellent for quickly banging out ugly a shitty asteroids clone. Later on you can move to C#, C++,

http://www.greenteapress.com/thinkpython/thinkCSpy/

Just keep typing shit directly into the interactive prompt and you'll figure stuff out quickly with its immediate feedback. The learning cycle is quick.

DONT READ SICP IT IS NP COMPLETE

Except Ruby doesn't showcase multiple paradigms. Try FIOC or Scheme not Haskell!!!

What is a FIOC? Never heard of such a language.

>>3
I recommend learning F# or Haskell as an absolute beginner. Also, "that book" which I refuse to name (think MIT 6.001), but only the first three chapters (up to the modularity/state/objects)

>>4
Name-dropping nerd

>>6
Are you trolling me?

>>6
Took me two seconds in google
Frame I/O Controller

>>9
 is it a programming language?

Damn it, don't learn haskell, you'll be like wtf destructive assignment non transparency when you learn anything serious

http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/code/

>>6
Forced Indentation of Code i.e. python

its so bad you invent new names for it.

Never listen to anyone uses or advises the use of any language with a #.

Read SICP http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/

After you will be able to make your own decision.

>>3
hard and convoluted
scheme, lisp

Wait, what? Those are the easiest languages. You've fallen for the Ctard anti-hype.

>>16
Scheme is the easiest language like Go is the easiest non-trivial board game.

>>17
Except Scheme has a zero-entry learning curve while Go starts at 3 feet or so.

>>18
If Scheme used normal syntax instead of that parenthesized reverse-polish notation crap it could be easy.

If you're intimately familiar with one language a lot of other languages in the same family are utterly trivial and it doesn't really matter which one you learn first. When you first learn Java, C#, C++, there really isn't much relearning language-wise you have to do when you tackle the others. It's pretty much personal preference. The point is that you're learning the very concept of functions, argument passing, return values, modules, if-then-else, loops, classes, objects, that sort of thing. Scheme, Haskell, ML, OCaml, K, the functional languages are in their own fucked up tiny inbred academic niche in terms of concepts that does not apply at all to the rest of the world. An abject beginner somehow managing to grasp Haskell as his first language would be ill-equipped to deal with the rest of the programming world. It's like raising your kid to speak Esperanto or Klingon. Way to fuck him up, you monster.

>>20
On one hand, this is perfectly accurate and I want to copypasta it to every thread where sicptrolls try to ruin a new student's career.

On the other hand, I hate new students and would rather they suffer whatever nightmarish journey they're sent on, perhaps deflecting them from the industry altogether.

>>19
If Scheme used a confusing mess of infix operations it would not only be harder, it wouldn't even work. Also RPN is completely different.

>>22
Add some sort of "THIS STUFF IS INFIX" syntax?

(setq cock {3 + 12 / 17})

>>22
enjoy your Lousy Inverted Stack Processing language.

>>20
You act like having a more sizeable population of programmers who don't think "lol skiim hard" is a bad thing. You know what's not going to improve the industry? Teaching newbies the same shitty languages they've always used. Do you think they'd be so popular if Sepples or somesuch wasn't the first language of every tech person who ever got asked for a recommendation?

>>25
scheme isn't capable of anything more complicated than calculating fibonacci numbers inefficiently.

>>24
You program have to write don't?

>>26
This poster is the kind of thing I'm referring to.

>>20
>>20
>>20
>>20
>>20
>>20
>>20
>>20
>>20
TAKE THAT SICPTROLLS

I NEVER LIKED SICP TO BEGIN WITH /PROG/!!! I ONLY SAID I READ IT BECAUSE I WANTED TO FIT IN WITH THE REST OF YOU!!!

>>30
Don't worry. Nobody here has actually read SICP.

>>31
_{I've read SICP}

>>25
You know what's not going to improve the industry? Teaching newbies the same shitty languages they've always used.
LISP had its run a long time ago.  Turned out it just wasn't that good.  When C came along, the industry switched, because you could actually get shit done with it.  Now there are ^{even more} productive languages around, and lots of people use them as well.  But NOBODY writes in LISP '(except as an academic exercise), because it's a useless toy.  A historical curiosity.

>>33
0/10. At least put some effort in your trolls.

>>33
Actually, AI crashed Lisp into the ground. Learn your history.