Chevron Left
Back to Programming Languages, Part B

Learner Reviews & Feedback for Programming Languages, Part B by University of Washington

4.9
stars
768 ratings

About the Course

[As described below, this is Part B of a 3-part course. Participants should complete Part A first -- Part B "dives right in" and refers often to material from Part A.] This course is an introduction to the basic concepts of programming languages, with a strong emphasis on functional programming. The course uses the languages ML, Racket, and Ruby as vehicles for teaching the concepts, but the real intent is to teach enough about how any language “fits together” to make you more effective programming in any language -- and in learning new ones. This course is neither particularly theoretical nor just about programming specifics -- it will give you a framework for understanding how to use language constructs effectively and how to design correct and elegant programs. By using different languages, you will learn to think more deeply than in terms of the particular syntax of one language. The emphasis on functional programming is essential for learning how to write robust, reusable, composable, and elegant programs. Indeed, many of the most important ideas in modern languages have their roots in functional programming. Get ready to learn a fresh and beautiful way to look at software and how to have fun building it. The course assumes some prior experience with programming, as described in more detail in the first module of Part A. Part B assumes successful completion of Part A. The course is divided into three Coursera courses: Part A, Part B, and Part C. As explained in more detail in the first module of Part A, the overall course is a substantial amount of challenging material, so the three-part format provides two intermediate milestones and opportunities for a pause before continuing. The three parts are designed to be completed in order and set up to motivate you to continue through to the end of Part C. Week 1 of Part A has a more detailed list of topics for all three parts of the course, but it is expected that most course participants will not (yet!) know what all these topics mean....

Top reviews

VA

Mar 18, 2018

This course (as Part A and C) is great - Dan is great in teaching and the content is perfect for anyone who wants to learn more about programming languages!

Warning - you might end up loving FP :)

AZ

Mar 23, 2018

Great course with really interesting and challenging assignments that allow to get more precise vision on programming languages (especially on PL's typing systems) and get experience with modern LISP

Filter by:

151 - 173 of 173 Reviews for Programming Languages, Part B

By Dingze W

•

Jul 25, 2018

great course

By Fry

•

Sep 24, 2017

very good!!!

By Sebastijan P

•

Mar 8, 2019

TOP course.

By Alejandro M

•

Nov 21, 2016

Excellent!

By Ahmed R

•

Sep 5, 2023

Fabulous.

By 彭福伟

•

Sep 28, 2016

wonderful

By Juspreet S

•

Feb 7, 2017

Awesome!

By Marc D

•

Aug 18, 2020

Great !

By Devin

•

Dec 7, 2017

Great!

By shengrang

•

Dec 19, 2016

nice

By Dheimersão B E

•

Oct 13, 2020

O

By Ivan T

•

Jun 24, 2017

G

By Евгений Ш

•

Sep 3, 2024

A good continuation of Programming Languages, Part A. The course contrasts the concepts of functional programming in a dynamic language. Pros: - very good comparison of static vs dynamic programming languages, - reinforcement of the same concepts in new way. Cons: - Racket (especially parentheses: Dan is right that HTML has the same approach, but in HTML/XML parentheses ARE DESCRIPTIVE). The instructor emphasizes that the concepts are what matters, not a particular implementation. However, this particular implementation is very painful, and you have to grasp it too to be able to do the assignments. Since almost nobody uses Racket in real development, it is a bad investment of time.

By Dennis S

•

Oct 30, 2024

I think the second module is too long. It should be split and homework should be split. Because after such a long module really forget a lot and hard to do homeworks; may be I say this because Racket has such un-intuitive language syntax so different from other languages.

By Gregory G

•

Jan 11, 2022

The MUPL exercise was hard. It involved writing a Racket interpreter for a made up programming language (MUPL).

By alfred

•

Jan 15, 2020

I think the course should be deeper and the assignment should be harder. Anyway, thanks for your effort!

By Atsushi

•

Jan 6, 2019

the course material was good! but the discussion forum was not so active.

By Deleted A

•

Oct 3, 2016

Excellent course material. Homework is a bit esoteric though.

By 刘长通

•

Sep 27, 2016

I learned a lot from this course, thank you.

By Wai K W

•

Jan 16, 2021

great course

By Venkatesh D

•

Feb 5, 2017

Good

By Mark B

•

Jan 11, 2021

Showed a bit of Racket but could have done more. The ML part seemed to have more depth

By Naresh

•

Oct 15, 2020

i am not interested in this course i want unenroll this course