is there any difference between learning algorithms with JAVA

>>56934776
c

File: Clrs3.jpg (50KB, 420x475px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 420x475px

>>56934776
technically speaking, there should not be differences. A whole swath of algorithms could be optimised by having control of the bare metal, but that's beside the point.

Algorithms are language agnostic, like pic related, they can be written in pseudocode.

>>56934776
better c bro

>>56934776
either is fine.

>>56934776
Not at all.
The most esteemed book on algorithms, Donald Knuth's TAOCP, doesn't use a commonly use language at all. Instead he invented a fictional Assembly language to describe the algorithms.

>>56935024
This, although I would say that the threshold for learning C might be a bit higher than Java. If you already know either language, then either language is fine for learning algorithms.

>>56935062
Well, in Knuth's defence, in that era, there were few languages at all and structural programming was barely invented. I mean, in TAoCP he invents a for loop.

Languages are the easy part.
Any competent programmer can pick up most languages within weeks.

When you mastered all the major algorithms in Java, you can VERY EASILY translate them to C or whatever you want.

learn both anon, take it from me.

>>56935062
but op pics book is a book that will allow averange hs to learn basic data structures and algos

knuth is more like reference manual

>>56934776
Out of those two C is a better option, just because most algorithms have nothing to do with java's object model. CLRS (>>56935024) defines all of their algorithms in terms of functions, for example.