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

Let's Not Call It "Computer Science" If We Really Mean "Computer Programming"

codemanship.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 205 posts

Re: Let's Not Call It "Computer Science" If We Really Mean "Computer Programming"

#131

Post by jes5199 »

tensor wrote: post #104
Peaker wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree it's more of a mathematical discipline than a science. But it isn't just "studying man-made creations". It's about studying computation in general. Not just man-made machines that compute.

Complexity theory is based on the idea of a turning machine, a man made thing. Mind you, information theory, which is often considered computer science, certainly applies to nature itself. Of course, it would be easy to claim that information theory isn't actually computer science. Personally, I consider most of computer science more math than science. In fact, I sometimes tell people I do math! (This is a great way…

a Turning machine is not a man-made thing! Turing-complete systems exist in natural reality, and a the Turing machine is just a way to explain them.

Re: Let's Not Call It "Computer Science" If We Really Mean "Computer Programming"

#132

Post by FreebytesSector »

jes5199 wrote: post #126

I interview a lot of people who want programming jobs. What I find is: almost nobody can program, and almost nobody knows basic CS 101 data structures. It does not matter if you are a self-taught programmer with ten years of experience in the best companies, odds are that you cannot solve a trivial coding exercise. It does not matter if you have a masters degree in Computer Science, odds are that you cannot successfu…

If a person is a self-taught programmer with ten years of experience working in a good company, then you are obviously programming for that company in a sufficient capacity even if you are unable to solve puzzles offered up by human resource managers that found them on Google by typing in "Questions for Programming Interviews." Programming is not about being able to solve brain teasers. Programming is about being able to deliver quality code. If the language handles most of these data structures for you or if you have used them before without actually considering it, then you obviously know their importance even if you cannot put it into words under stress. Do not degrade people that cannot repeat verbatim some useless information they read in a book or solve brain teasers in minutes (unless they had already seen those puzzles.) Being able to work hard, clean, in a team, and supply a functional product on time according to specifications are the most important traits.

Re: Let's Not Call It "Computer Science" If We Really Mean "Computer Programming"

#133

Post by qznc »

jeffdavis wrote: post #62

While we're at it, why is it called Computer Science ? I think "Computational Mathematics" or something would make more sense.

In Germany it is "Informatics" a portmanteau of "information" and "automatic", since the field is about automatic information processing in general.

Re: Let's Not Call It "Computer Science" If We Really Mean "Computer Programming"

#134

Post by Tyr42 »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #100
vbtemp wrote: post #95

#1 (My Ad-Hominem Attack) Who is this guy? Why does he go on to trash comp sci if he never studied it? #2 "Of all the mathematical sciences, computer science is unquestionably the dullest. If I had my time again, despite discovering just how much I love writing software, I still wouldn't study computer science." I stopped reading after this point. Why does he state as a matter-of-fact that computer science is unquest…

Starting with your ad hominem, I think you took exactly the wrong things away from this article. Regardless of his writing style, his points are dead-on: 1. Computer science doesn't teach programming (with the corollary that computer scientists specifically don't want to teach programming). 2. Most people going into computer science want to learn programming. 3. Many people get fed up with the rigors of computer scie…

That's the way it's set up at Waterloo, with soft-eng in Engineering, and CompSci in the Math Faculty. That being said, in Computer Science we have some classes on bash scripting and C++, which I think are valuable, but not as fun as functional programming or compilers. Still more fun than our very dry formal logic class, which is sad, because I like formal logic.

Re: Let's Not Call It "Computer Science" If We Really Mean "Computer Programming"

#135

Post by j-b »

dxbydt wrote: post #118

fwiw, an opposite take, from a decade ago. at my cs pgm, the assistant professors were supposed to make a presentation on day 1 so the grad students could make an informed decision which prof to work with, which subjects to sign up for. the software engg prof was a glib, entreprenurial hotshot who said "my students have been placed at netscape, sun, microsoft, oracle". he talked about industry partnerships, internshi…

Degrees don't matter so much. Can you learn? Are you smart? Can you ship good code (given enough training)? Real programming skills comes through experience and domain knowledge. I am less interested in the educational background of developers that I've hired than I am of their future growth potential which has more to do with personality than IQ.

Re: Let's Not Call It "Computer Science" If We Really Mean "Computer Programming"

#136

Post by jsprinkles »

jes5199 wrote: post #126

I interview a lot of people who want programming jobs. What I find is: almost nobody can program, and almost nobody knows basic CS 101 data structures. It does not matter if you are a self-taught programmer with ten years of experience in the best companies, odds are that you cannot solve a trivial coding exercise. It does not matter if you have a masters degree in Computer Science, odds are that you cannot successfu…

Probably because the vast majority of the "programming" field as it stands today barely exercises computer science knowledge. Linked list optimizations, heaps, that stuff isn't even on the radar of most devs hacking on a startup, frankly, because the language hides it away. And they are not inferior programmers if they can execute on their knowledge, are they?

I hate that, to most folks who are into CS, CS is a yardstick for how much value a hacker will develop. "Can't optimize this from O(n^2) to O(n)? I have no idea how you keep your job." There is far more to the value produced by a hacker than the typical interview questions, and this elitist attitude out of most compsci folks is obnoxious.

This is why, even though I understand CS, grilling me on theoretical CS in your interview is automatic points off and I'll accept the position that actually quizzes on practical. I'm definitely of the mind now, being a self-taught programmer with a working knowledge of compsci, that I will learn things when they're needed to execute (not so they'll sit around in my brain waiting for the manager that Googled hard interview questions to ask).

Re: Let's Not Call It "Computer Science" If We Really Mean "Computer Programming"

#137

Post by randomdata »

tomstuart wrote: post #37

I agree that a lot of people only need to learn how to program, but I find computer science genuinely fascinating and mind-expanding, so it's a shame that more programmers don't feel like they're able to access it, either because of unfamiliarity with formal mathematics or a justifiable aversion to the "category theory or GTFO" attitude. Which is why I'm writing http://experthuman.com/computation-book .

I wasn't permitted to study CS formally (no school would accept me), but I've never found the study itself to be particularly inaccessible. There is a lot of great information out there that anyone can access.

I think people are just apt to become discouraged. There is the prevailing idea that only CS students can learn CS, especially on places like HN, which causes people, who would otherwise be more than capable, to shy away from studying the topic.

Re: Let's Not Call It "Computer Science" If We Really Mean "Computer Programming"

#138

Post by jsprinkles »

dxbydt wrote: post #118

fwiw, an opposite take, from a decade ago. at my cs pgm, the assistant professors were supposed to make a presentation on day 1 so the grad students could make an informed decision which prof to work with, which subjects to sign up for. the software engg prof was a glib, entreprenurial hotshot who said "my students have been placed at netscape, sun, microsoft, oracle". he talked about industry partnerships, internshi…

> I was personally not cut out to do scut work. I had zero interest and respect for maintenance, unit tests, requirements & specs, UML modelling, refactoring, waterfall method, agile, kanban...

The world in which this is "scut work" is not the world I want to live in.

Let's be honest. You don't want to do practical, you'd rather do theoretical, and that's fine. However, don't disrespect practical just because it isn't your bag of chips, particularly to an audience that is full of practical engineers. I could spend all day disrespecting theoretical -- mainly because most of those passionate about theoretical at the expense of practical make comments like these -- but I do not, because I see theoretical as necessary for our craft.

Re: Let's Not Call It "Computer Science" If We Really Mean "Computer Programming"

#139

Post by capkutay »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #100
vbtemp wrote: post #95

#1 (My Ad-Hominem Attack) Who is this guy? Why does he go on to trash comp sci if he never studied it? #2 "Of all the mathematical sciences, computer science is unquestionably the dullest. If I had my time again, despite discovering just how much I love writing software, I still wouldn't study computer science." I stopped reading after this point. Why does he state as a matter-of-fact that computer science is unquest…

Starting with your ad hominem, I think you took exactly the wrong things away from this article. Regardless of his writing style, his points are dead-on: 1. Computer science doesn't teach programming (with the corollary that computer scientists specifically don't want to teach programming). 2. Most people going into computer science want to learn programming. 3. Many people get fed up with the rigors of computer scie…

In my experience as a CS student, the fist few classes you take teach you the basics of "computer programming"...aka you just write a lot of object oriented programs. Then as you move on to parallel programming, computer architecture, and operating systems, it really becomes more of a science.

Re: Let's Not Call It "Computer Science" If We Really Mean "Computer Programming"

#140

Post by capkutay »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #100
vbtemp wrote: post #95

#1 (My Ad-Hominem Attack) Who is this guy? Why does he go on to trash comp sci if he never studied it? #2 "Of all the mathematical sciences, computer science is unquestionably the dullest. If I had my time again, despite discovering just how much I love writing software, I still wouldn't study computer science." I stopped reading after this point. Why does he state as a matter-of-fact that computer science is unquest…

Starting with your ad hominem, I think you took exactly the wrong things away from this article. Regardless of his writing style, his points are dead-on: 1. Computer science doesn't teach programming (with the corollary that computer scientists specifically don't want to teach programming). 2. Most people going into computer science want to learn programming. 3. Many people get fed up with the rigors of computer scie…

In my experience as a CS student, the fist few classes you take teach you the basics of "computer programming"...aka you just write a lot of object oriented programs. Then as you move on to parallel programming, computer architecture, and operating systems, it really becomes more of a science.
Post reply on HN