41–50 of 90 posts
I wish my school offered something even half good as this. I've seen it like 2 years ago and it is well prepared course. >CS 6120 is a PhD-level Cornell CS course by Adrian Sampson on programming language implementation. I just dont understand why is this "PhD level"
For example, they read and discuss papers rather than just working out of a textbook.
Me too. In my school, we had great introduction/mid-level classes but at the graduate level, I found our classes underwhelming. Mostly Prof/Researchers teaching their narrow specialties and trying to recruit PhD students, but without putting much time in their lectures as they didn't care about teaching. Bunch of slides, research papers to read. They wouldn't bother making a heavy programming project, which was left to their colleagues doing less research.
When am I going to be able to do self-paced for credit courses from good schools online without the crazy price tag?
An important component of credit courses is the time limitness so this seems unlikely to happen.
Huh? Why would that be an important component?
I mean I know that it's typical for courses that come with credit, but in my mind it's just a side effect of the administrative side of providing courses, not something that's at all central to accreditation. I.e. if you build up the knowledge over a longer period (which you can still do with e.g. resits) that's completely fine as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here you go: https://users.cs.utah.edu/~pandey/courses/cs6530/fall22/sche...
That class just uses my slides. It says so at the bottom of the page: > The lecture slides used in the course are taken from Prof. Andy Pavlo's CMU 15-721 course Just go to the source: https://15721.courses.cs.cmu.edu/spring2023/
I wish my school offered something even half good as this. I've seen it like 2 years ago and it is well prepared course. >CS 6120 is a PhD-level Cornell CS course by Adrian Sampson on programming language implementation. I just dont understand why is this "PhD level"
> I just dont understand why is this "PhD level" It would have been if the papers covered were closer to the state of the art. The most recent one is from 2015. However, this course would actually give you the background required to read more recent paper and work on compiler research, so calling it PhD level is not a huge stretch.
In that vein, it makes a lot more sense to focus on a solid, foundational paper than whatever incrementalism came out most recently. SLP vectorization is a good example here--yeah, the foundational paper is 20 years old at this point, but you'd rather students read and understand that than whatever the most recent addition to SLP vectorization came out in this (or last) year's PLDI. Even the other papers I think I might add or substitute for others in this course aren't going to be substantially newer than the stuff already here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Precisely made for "creating a new language, interpreter, and compiler from scratch": http://craftinginterpreters.com
This does not cover compilers. I know because I specifically asked munificent (the author) about this before and he mentioned some other books to look at.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here you go: https://users.cs.utah.edu/~pandey/courses/cs6530/fall22/sche...
That class just uses my slides. It says so at the bottom of the page: > The lecture slides used in the course are taken from Prof. Andy Pavlo's CMU 15-721 course Just go to the source: https://15721.courses.cs.cmu.edu/spring2023/
Are there any courses on creating a new language, interpreter, and compiler from scratch? Like not using LLVM or similar to generate intermediate representation but to literally pick an ISA and, well, compile for it.
> I wish my school offered something even half good as this. Me too. In my school, we had great introduction/mid-level classes but at the graduate level, I found our classes underwhelming. Mostly Prof/Researchers teaching their narrow specialties and trying to recruit PhD students, but without putting much time in their lectures as they didn't care about teaching. Bunch of slides, research papers to read. They wouldn…
Fairly underwhelming. Lots of online resources to chase after to catch up to the state of the art, but a lot of the courses are things like the history of, and developments of, the technology. Worth knowing, but I don't need multiple, year-long adventures in this stuff -- get me to modern, and then let's solve some actual problems!
When am I going to be able to do self-paced for credit courses from good schools online without the crazy price tag?