Art vs. Computer Science
blog.steveklabnik.com
Art vs. Computer Science
1–10 of 39 posts
Re: Art vs. Computer Science
#2I had to vote this one up. Thanks for submitting it.
I have a few posts related to this half written, but I haven't gotten around to finishing them yet. I think this is a really interesting topic that doesn't get enough discussion in the community at large. We already have "IT vs IS vs CS" distinctions that are tenuous at best, yet I think most people tend to approach CS more of an art or craft than as a science.
"Computer Science" as a term has really gotten muddled by the universities. I try to stick to its original definition, but I'm unsure how long it'll stay that way, considering languages change over time...
Re: Art vs. Computer Science
#3As you might guess, I think this completely misses the point.
See: http://blog.computationalcomplexity.org/2006/07/science-and-...
Re: Art vs. Computer Science
#4As you might guess, I think this completely misses the point. See: http://blog.computationalcomplexity.org/2006/07/science-and-...
I don't think that CS in a strict sense should go away. On the contrary, I don't think more formal methods are thought about enough. However, I do think that outside of the box thinking is important, and things that are not strictly scientific can be pursued from other perspectives, such as api design or interface design.
Offtopic: wow, this droid is hard to type on compared to my iPod touch. Sorry this response was so mangled the first few times.
Re: Art vs. Computer Science
#5I think of the non-hardware parts of computer science as applied philosophy.
Art seems wrong to me as a descriptor because it would imply that I'm writing code for a sort of aesthetic beauty. The aesthetic beauty should be in the end result.
Which also means it probably isn't science, because really what I worry about when I'm programming is that the end result will be correct. To some extent I am concerned about scientific process, having a program that is repeatably verifiable as doing what I expect, but in terms of actually using scientific methods to write software, I can't really say I do that very much. As with the beauty, the science is in the end result and not really the process.
Which brings me to why I think it is applied philosophy:
What am I doing when I write code? I am taking a problem and deconstructing it into different pieces, finding ways to represent the different pieces, and reasoning about how everything should interact. I think this basically holds true for functional, object oriented, and imperative programming.
I think that from this perspective, writing code is closest to some sort of philosophical inquery. You are using a computer to build abstractions, and through enough abstractions (or abstractions written by someone else, imported in libraries), you are able to create something.
Re: Art vs. Computer Science
#6As you might guess, I think this completely misses the point. See: http://blog.computationalcomplexity.org/2006/07/science-and-...
I don't think that CS in a strict sense should go away. On the contrary, I don't think more formal methods are thought about enough. However, I do think that outside of the box thinking is important, and things that are not strictly scientific can be pursued from other perspectives, such as api design or interface design. Offtopic: wow, this droid is hard to type on compared to my iPod touch. Sorry this response was…
The point is that the art of computing should be much more interesting than anything to do with coding style. See the link above.
Re: Art vs. Computer Science
#7I think a project like OpenFrameworks embody some of the thoughts in the post: http://www.openframeworks.cc/ (don't get put off by the fact that it's C++)
Re: Art vs. Computer Science
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that CS in a strict sense should go away. On the contrary, I don't think more formal methods are thought about enough. However, I do think that outside of the box thinking is important, and things that are not strictly scientific can be pursued from other perspectives, such as api design or interface design. Offtopic: wow, this droid is hard to type on compared to my iPod touch. Sorry this response was…
The point is that the art of computing should be much more interesting than anything to do with coding style. See the link above.
I don't think anything should be more interesting than anything else. Different things appeal to different people. As I get older, I find myself becoming more interested in things that are more in the realm of engineering than strictly theoretical science. Doesn't mean theory is good or bad, and I do like some theory topics.
Re: Art vs. Computer Science
#9Re: Art vs. Computer Science
#10In college, I was an English major. I took CS 101 because it was the ONLY course open and I needed 3 more credits. In the first or second class Bob Geitz (the professor) demonstrated that you can directly transform a FOR loop into a DO...WHILE--they were completely interchangeable, but had different nuances.
This was a transformative moment for me--I realized that computer code is poetry, with all the beauty and elegance and difficulty that implies. Further, it is poetry that can alter the physical world. In legends and mythology, what is the one-word name for "poetry that alters the physical world"? Magic.
I've been a computer professional ever since.