Re: What's the best language to start with

["Alexander E. Kopilovitch" <aek@pcaek.spb.su>]

In  <dewar.839812305@schonberg> dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:

>>I did not say that software engineers are incompetent and I did not say that
>>"programmers" are more competent than "software engineers". The difference
>>between these terms (or labels, if you want) doesn't directly relate to
>>some general competence. These "labels" can designate different _priorities_.
>>And you could not expect the same profile of competence from people with
>>substantionally different priorities.
>
>Well I can't reconcile these two paragraphs, perhaps it is a language
>problem, or perhaps there are two Alexanders :-)

Maybe language problem exists, which makes last 2.5 lines of my (cited) text
invisible.

>In the first paragraph you say that incompetence (of this kind) is
>characteristic of a "substanional" part of the growing mass of these
>brave software engineers, and then in the second paragraph you
>said that you were not commenting on relative competence associated
>with the two labels.

I repeat in hope that you can see these lines written in capital letters:

LABELS  "PROGRAMMER"  AND  "SOFTWARE  ENGINEER"  CAN  DESIGNATE  DIFFERENT
PRIORITIES.  THESE  DIFFERENT  PRIORITIES  OFTEN  LEAD  TO  DIFFERENT
PROFILES  OF  COMPETENCE.


>You seem to definitely have some derogatory reaction to the term SE,

No, I have no negative reaction to the term SE when it is used properly.
I have no negative reaction to the phrase "Windows 95 is an operating system",
but I become angry when I hear that "Operating systems are variations of
Windows 95".

> which you are certainly entitled to,
You guess is wrong until now. Thanks God. In my current conditions I cannot
be good SE, if I'm SE then I'm poor SE. But in the same time I can be
good programmer, and I hope I am. And I can emulate poor SE if it is needed.

> but
>for me a software engineer is merely a programmer who takes an organized
>engineering perspective to the job of producing code,

The point is "organized engineering perspective". Good thing. If you can
follow it without substantional hazards for final effect - very good. But
if there is an alternative... maybe you cannot imagine it ... or maybe you
think that such alternatives may appear only for very stupid people...
well, if there is such an alternative then the choice of SE and the choice of
programmer probably would be opposite.


>... one
>of the things we learn from the engineering disciplines is a respect for
>the body of knowledge associated with an engineering field.

Completely agree.


------------------------------------------------------------
Alexander Kopilovitch                      aek@vib.usr.pu.ru
Saint-Petersburg
Russia