From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1014db,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,1042f393323e22da X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public From: kaz@vision.crest.nt.com (Kaz Kylheku) Subject: Re: Any research putting c above ada? Date: 1997/05/16 Message-ID: <5li53d$irf@bcrkh13.bnr.ca>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 241956963 References: <5le6vf$15p@bcrkh13.bnr.ca> <01bc6189$b074f500$LocalHost@xhv46.dial.pipex.com> Organization: Prism Systems Inc. Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-05-16T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <01bc6189$b074f500$LocalHost@xhv46.dial.pipex.com>, Nick Roberts wrote: > > >Kaz Kylheku wrote in article ><5le6vf$15p@bcrkh13.bnr.ca>... >[...] >> Heck, I propose that we do away with learning all together. We should >instead >> hold retreats in the woods to get in touch with those engineers inside of >us >> that are just yearning to be set free! Only then will we develop better >> software, in the most natural way. > > >Kaz, this approach may well produce crap software, but it sounds like a lot >of fun for the programmers :-) I don't know what I was ranting about. It was sort of my sarcastic reaction to all this ``computer science bad, experience good'' business. My point is that in other engineering fields (if SW engineering can indeed be considered one) practitioners do not denigrate the theoretical underpinnings. Computer science is a good thing, even if the pure theoretical foundations don't teach you how to construct software. I believe that CS programs should stand on their own. A good CS education offers things that are not quite covered in engineering or mathematics programs, even though there are sometimes significant overlaps. At my alma mater, there was an interesting situation: some of the upper division computer science courses had precise electrical engineering counterparts. If a student somehow took both counterparts, credit would have been awarded for just one, and either one counted as an equivalent prerequisite to other courses or for graduation requirements. Among these courses were intro to operating systems, computer graphics and computer architectures. The consensus among the students was that the CS versions of these courses were far more challenging and interesting, with better lecturers. As a result, we had quite a few engineers in these classes. A lot of CS subject matter just doesn't fit into engineering or mathematics, though it could fit if the school of engineering had a specific deparment for software engineering. Should an engineering school teach compiler construction, distributed systems or artificial intelligence courses? Should a mathematics department? There are schools which have folded computer science and engineering departments together, and it does seem to work. >Then again, maybe Microsoft got there first? :) >Nick. >