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: fc89c,97188312486d4578 X-Google-Attributes: gidfc89c,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,baaf5f793d03d420 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,97188312486d4578 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,6154de2e240de72a X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public From: djohnson@tartarus.ucsd.edu (Darin Johnson) Subject: Re: What's the best language to start with? [was: Re: Should I learn C or Pascal?] Date: 1996/07/31 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 171336789 sender: djohnson@tartarus.ucsd.edu references: organization: UCSD Computer Science and Engineering Department newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.unix.programmer,comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-07-31T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: > >it would be as if EE students were taught IC design in the first > >course, and were only given resisters, capacitors, ohm's law, > >etc. in their senior year, almost as an afterthought! > > Well, it may be going that way. Most of the logic design in my department is > now done in a Hardware Description Language; Is that an EE class though? I doubt an *EE* class would get to the point where resisters/capacitors/etc are only taught as an afterthought (unless of course, the students are expected to already know this from physics classes). Most EE students don't even get to do IC design, or even get jobs doing IC design. > Sure, there is a need for a few people to understand the nuts and > bolts, but these few will be writing the libraries and designing the > silicon i.e., making the tools. As long as the rest of us can use > the tools, what does it matter how they work? Then the "rest of us" don't need to go to universities. We're not talking about how to use tools, we're talking about learning at the university level. Why bother even learning programming if "the rest of us" are only going to use the end-products? Do you advocate that arithmetic need not be taught, because "the rest of us" can just buy calculators? If that's all you want from programming, then don't go to a university, there are plenty of 2-bit tradeschools, 4-bit tradeschools, and even some excellent tradeschools. (however, most EE oriented tradeschools will teach capacitors, resistors, and Ohm's law, even if they never get around to Fourier or Laplace transforms) If you don't like CS, then don't get a degree in CS, it's that simple. If you're in a CS program, the university can only assume you want to learn CS; even if they have a programming focus available, it surely won't be a "learn the minimum only" sort of degree. If you don't want to learn, you don't have to, just don't spread your anti-learning philosophy to others. Yes, today at this moment, if you only know C++ you can get a job. But in the past, and hopefully in the future again, you're not going to get and keep a job if you aren't adaptable and flexible and able to pick up a new OS or language or programming technique or whatever. This field is not static. Few fields are static. You always need to learn new things and do things differently and use new tools, even if you're not the one designing the new things. What good is your CNE going to do you when no one uses Novell anymore? What about when TCP/IP never gets used anymore? Or C, C++, or Ada? Do you think the standard state of affairs should be to require massive retraining whenever the industry changes? -- Darin Johnson djohnson@ucsd.edu O- The trouble with conspiracy theories are that they assume the government is organized.