Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Computer science as a lost art (2015)

rubyhacker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–146 of 146 posts

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#141

Post by tabtab »

supermdguy wrote: post #9
frostburg wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not that sold on this. Programming in ASM isn't really "harder" than programming in Haskell, it's just slower - it requires discipline, but not the ability to grasp abstraction that some more modern languages need. I think that issues like knowing "how do compilers actually work" or "this thing is actually the halting problem, let's stop" are more relevant than how removed from latches and memory controllers one…

> Programming in ASM isn't really "harder" than programming in Haskell, it's just slower - it requires discipline, but not the ability to grasp abstraction that some more modern languages need. Reminds me of this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17403233

That story reminds me of a guy who made a CRUD application (tracking, reports, & statistics) out of MS-Excel VBA. I was asked to start supporting it, and did a lot of similar head scratching. Amateur programming can be worse than no automation at times.

He wasn't bitter, however; just confused about my assessment about it being time-consuming to support. I had to explain that typical programmers use abstractions to make code maintainable and not rely on our ability to read, well, spaghetti code fast. I've met some programmers quick at deciphering spaghetti code, but I confessed I wasn't one of them. I used the analogy of taking a custom-built amateur car with a custom-built engine to a generic auto-mechanic and expecting them to figure it out as fast as a regular car. That story seemed to click.

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#142

Post by yontherubicon »

learc83 wrote: post #21
yontherubicon wrote: post #7

So, for the dogshed builders among us, what might be the recommended pathway to learn some architecture--beyond the obvious academic options? I'm sure this has been covered to death on HN already, but if anyone has a link bookmarked and feels like sharing?

Depends on what you mean by architecture. But if you mean what you'd learn in a Computer Architecture and a Computer Org class, this course/book is good. https://www.nand2tetris.org/

I meant it in the context of the article, where the metaphor was made between a dogshed-builder--a person who can code--and an architect--a person who understands CS and uses it to build things using code.

Appreciate the rec!

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#143

Post by sircastor »

lostcolony wrote: post #107

I was involved in the hiring and filling of > 50 developer positions at a company, while being a tech lead. We tried hiring a few people with just bootcamps. Only a few (so hardly a representative sample), but none of them worked out. As soon as they had to try something even the slightest bit different than what they'd done in the bootcamp they were lost. There were people with degrees in unrelated fields who then d…

For a counter example, I'll say that we've got 3 Bootcamp graduates on our team at work and they've all been very good. They've all moved into languages beyond what they learned in their courses. One has become a major platform contributor and has been a driving force in decisions being made. Another has been working with hardware and system deployment. They're all very driven, I've been quite impressed.

Now the caveat to my statements there are that all three already had degrees, in disparate fields unrelated to CS/CE. It's an example of capable individuals being able to learn practical skills in anything.

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#144

Post by wongma »

sircastor wrote: post #143
lostcolony wrote: post #107

I was involved in the hiring and filling of > 50 developer positions at a company, while being a tech lead. We tried hiring a few people with just bootcamps. Only a few (so hardly a representative sample), but none of them worked out. As soon as they had to try something even the slightest bit different than what they'd done in the bootcamp they were lost. There were people with degrees in unrelated fields who then d…

For a counter example, I'll say that we've got 3 Bootcamp graduates on our team at work and they've all been very good. They've all moved into languages beyond what they learned in their courses. One has become a major platform contributor and has been a driving force in decisions being made. Another has been working with hardware and system deployment. They're all very driven, I've been quite impressed. Now the cave…

Those aren't really counterexamples. They corroborate this finding by the OP:

>There were people with degrees in unrelated fields who then did a bootcamp who were good

Re: Computer science as a lost art (2015)

#146

Post by Taniwha »

learc83 wrote: post #134
Taniwha wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

English (and NZ and Aussie) universities have 3 year courses because high school kids pass minimum national requirements exams before they enter, US high school graduation is not uniform across the country, or even across states - in essence those minimum requirements ensure that students entering Uni have already met what in the US would be the General Education requirement

That's not whey they have 3 year vs 4 year courses. The 3 year vs 4 year debate is a legacy of philosophical differences about what qualifies a liberal education that are far older than standardized national secondary curricula. Universities in the US have entrance requirements for classes completed in high school. They do the same thing English universities do when admiring American students--they require specific g…

well yeah, they let people test out if they meet already can meet the requirement
Post reply on HN