I think that is a bit of an exaggeration. It depends who is teaching; there is a school of thought that you can teach programming and add object‑orientation later. I am not convinced by that, but I wasn't taught that way; I was taught objects from the word go.
Junilu Lacar wrote:. . . Pedagogy still at least a decade behind. Sigh.
Norm Radder wrote:I rarely see any documentation for code these days.
Agree. And as I have said several time before, that isn't how I was taught. We were taught objects first, then selection, then iteration. I would do it rather like that, but lots of objects first,
Junilu Lacar wrote:. . . a general purpose object-oriented language, is often taught without much of a focus on object orientation. . . ..
Stephan van Hulst wrote:I disagree with you Salvin. When your method signatures change a zillion times, you haven't spent enough time on your design before you opened your editor.