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: f5d71,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: 146b77,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid146b77,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: sb463ba@d250-hrz.uni-duisburg.de (Georg Bauhaus) Subject: Re: Dynamic memory? (was Re: Ada vs C++ vs Java) Date: 1999/01/21 Message-ID: <7866s8$apa$1@news-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 435080366 References: <369C1F31.AE5AF7EF@concentric.net> <369DDDC3.FDE09999@sea.ericsson.se> <369e309a.32671759@news.demon.co.uk> <369F0592.94F9DDDA@dresdner-bank.com> <77pnr4$ch3$1@newnews.global.net.uk> <36a3281a.11980677@news.demon.co.uk> <77vclp$rme@news3.euro.net> <36a34176.18473393@news.demon.co.uk> <77vi92$944@news3.euro.net> <36a357bb.24173519@news.demon.co.uk> <7803e9$825$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> Followup-To: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.vxworks,comp.lang.java Organization: Gerhard-Mercator-Universitaet - Gesamthochschule Duisburg Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.vxworks,comp.lang.java Date: 1999-01-21T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com wrote: : In article <36a357bb.24173519@news.demon.co.uk>, : johnb@invision.co.uk wrote: : It amazes me how many people today write in a high level : language and haven't the foggiest idea what is going on : at the code generation level! Then what about this: It amazes me how many people today drive taxis and buses and haven't the foggiest idea what is going on under the hood! Can we really expect every programmer to be a ``computer scientist'', to some extent? I'm not saying that this wouldn't be desireable. (I've chosen the term ``computer scientist'' here to mean someone who knows about the inner workings of compilers. This might be considered inappropriate because there is much more to computer science, but think of a dummie who does not know admiring the wise guy who does. He/she will certainly see him as a computer scientist. See below.) I've found it very helpful to learn a few things about Perl's internal data structures, e.g.. This clarifies a lot, but then I am aware that most Perl programmers-on-the-road, meaning people who just write Perl scripts, are quite unaware of Perl related things that others find indispensable to know. I cannot really judge whether this holds for other languages, too. May I ask a question then? Given it is so helpful to know what is going on at lower levels (I think it is!), given further that an unknown number of programmers does not know these things, and that it possibly means the higher level to them knowing assembly languages, what can be done to reverse or rearrange the learning process and to help these persons not to get lost in an arcane djungle of complex abstract words and symbols of high level languages without getting to know computing machinery, mathematics and data structures and algorithms? Whats your estimate of the number of skilled programmers versus the number of needed programmers? regards, Georg Bauhaus P.S.: This is not a question to be answered in language specifications, say, but I think that masters should not only discuss languages but also how they are used and taught, because otherwise education, skill, and wit will get lost - which are so important in evoking the enthusiasm that makes you go on.