the new math: old battle of the lovees was: PDP1 3594
What I meant is that many of them come to college having already done some code-writing. Maybe that's only a few years' head start over what it was like when I was an undergraduate.
Admittedly there are things they don't learn from writing code in Java or C++, which AFAIK are the most common languages taught ("taught"?) in high schools in recent years. But I think it teaches them something I didn't know at that age.
Many of them also seem much more comfortable with taking apart their gear than I am. I don't know that that indicates much understanding either, but it seems like it means *something*.
the new math: old battle of the lovees was: PDP1 3597
Of course he's famous. That doesn't make him right 100% of the time. He didn't practice...
the new math: old battle of the lovees was: PDP1 3595
plug'nplaying is not taking apart the gear. But he didn't. Read it again..and again. and then read again. I certainly had to. The guy packed a ton...
Yeah .... I would probably make a claim about EW Dijkstra being able to do both. But maybe to know for sure one would have had to know him better, or watch him work.
Hm. I didn't get that at all from what he said, but maybe so. I think his discussion reminded me more of a student I worked with this past year, a physics major dabbling in CS courses (but with a real flair for the subject), who seemed to think in terms of physical analogies as much as abstract concepts. That's not how my mind works, so it was interesting to observe.
At the drop of a hat, yeah. But I didn't think I was arguing with Joe, exactly ....
Hm! Different, maybe, but "quite different"?
Points where I'd be surprised to hear much dissent:
(*) I'd include a fair amount of mathematics, not so much for the specifics as for the way of thinking it encourages (IMO). IME, the people in our field who seem to be thinking most clearly are often the ones with training or interest in math.
(*) I'd include some exposure to what happens in the computer below the level of high-level languages -- buttembly language, machine code, possibly a bit of circuit design at the level of AND and OR gates.
Points where I think you and I anyway might disagree:
(*) Unless prompted, I might not include training in the physical sciences. That's an area where my background is somewhat weaker than I'd like it to be, so I'm biased.
I'm probably leaving out something you think is critical, but I'm curious about what you think that is.
-- B. L. Mbuttingill ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.
Alt Folklore Computers Newsgroups