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

Equations True Computer Science Geeks Should (at Least Pretend to) Know

elegantcoding.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 100 posts

Re: Equations True Computer Science Geeks Should (at Least Pretend to) Know

#51

Post by tikhonj »

fragsworth wrote: post #49
king_magic wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Programming is math. Highly advanced math, in fact. It's just a different type of math. And the 11 equations in the OP's article just barely touches on what CS is about. There is far more to it than that.

You can disagree all you want but it is pretty much objective fact that in practice, especially in the world of business, 99% of programming is not advanced at all. CS, which is not just programming, may be advanced, but you do not see the advanced concepts emerging very often in day-to-day programming.

However, the real question is whether there's no advanced stuff because of the domain or because of the people who work there. If enough people working at a company don't like advanced math, it means that they will not use it and if you use it, your code will be harder for them to maintain, so you don't use it either. I suspect if everybody had a better grasp of these ideas, you would see them used more often.

Re: Equations True Computer Science Geeks Should (at Least Pretend to) Know

#52

Post by ChuckMcM »

krobertson wrote: post #25
sk5t wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, this article was a very poor read from the perspective of a programmer (yours truly) having a working familiarity with only two or three of these concepts. Given the article's slapdash, loosely-coherent English and tendency to pad out each equation's section with references to even more equations--and not explanation of usefulness--I wish I hadn't tried to read it, for it was very frustrating. I suppose the a…

I had to actually double check if the author was from the US or not, since in some places it was just so incomprehensible. I agree the applications were glossed over or skipped, but that is probably the most interesting aspect of the equations as well. Without practical information, the article is sorely missing true sustenance.

This effect is often true for people whose native language is math :-) But to be fair most disciplines have their own jargon, math happens to have its own keyboard too.

Re: Equations True Computer Science Geeks Should (at Least Pretend to) Know

#53

Post by jerf »

Splines wrote: post #48
henning wrote: post #10

Since it seems like the multicore thing is here to stay, may I suggest that if you are doing anything parallel you should know about Amdahl's law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_computing#Amdahl.27s_l...

Huh, that's interesting. I never considered the similarities between parallel processing and people management until today.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queueing_theory

Re: Equations True Computer Science Geeks Should (at Least Pretend to) Know

#54

Post by peterwwillis »

peterwwillis wrote: post #22

So, I take it I shouldn't even consider getting a CS degree since I really suck at math?

(Damn it, I wish I could edit old posts...)

Thanks everyone for the words of encouragement, but when I was going to school it would take me 4 hours to complete 15 simple homework math equations, even with the ritalin. 'Hard work' in the form of 4 years of that stuff would make me commit suicide.

Moreover, I just don't care to understand complex math. I do want to know how to design compilers and write embedded kernel drivers. If advanced math is required to be able to do these things, CS isn't for me.

Re: Equations True Computer Science Geeks Should (at Least Pretend to) Know

#55

Post by alexholehouse »

peterwwillis wrote: post #54
peterwwillis wrote: post #22

So, I take it I shouldn't even consider getting a CS degree since I really suck at math?

(Damn it, I wish I could edit old posts...) Thanks everyone for the words of encouragement, but when I was going to school it would take me 4 hours to complete 15 simple homework math equations, even with the ritalin. 'Hard work' in the form of 4 years of that stuff would make me commit suicide. Moreover, I just don't care to understand complex math. I do want to know how to design compilers and write embedded kernel…

The not caring is kind of crucial, beyond anything else. If you don't care, it's not interesting to you, and if it's not interesting to you it's probably not worth dedicating your time to. Life is short - do what you love.

THAT SAID I totally agree with what people have said, and the amount of "maths" you need beyond basic arithmetic in CS depends very much on your chosen field of interest, which, given that you don't care about complex maths, probably won't be too mathematically heavy.

Re: Equations True Computer Science Geeks Should (at Least Pretend to) Know

#56

Post by bitwize »

methodin wrote: post #9

I really wish my brain didn't gloss over the first time I see a math symbol. All of this stuff seems intriguing but it's almost as if I'm hardwired to translate all those symbols into mush. I'd be much more interested in seeing the equivalent code snippets these ideas express.

I have the same problem, but I think I figured out a way around it.

You have to fight the gloss-over effect. It takes conscious effort. Remember that "deliberate practice" all those blog entries say it takes to master something? Well, same thing. You have to deliberately overcome your brain's tendency to go "math is hard, let's go shopping!" Eventually you'll be able to look at an equation and recognize patterns. When I hit the link I was like "Oh, man, MATH, so bo-- hey wait, that's Bayes's theorem! I know this!" (Yes, just like the Jurassic Park girl.)

So keep working at it. Maybe you'll want to try -- gasp! -- actually cracking a math book and studying the material they present.

Re: Equations True Computer Science Geeks Should (at Least Pretend to) Know

#57

Post by anrope »

krupan wrote: post #50

Shannon's Information Theory, Eigenvector, DeMorgan's Laws, etc. None of those names are meaningful or descriptive. And then the greek letters and made up symbols. Math could learn something from Computer Science: https://www.google.com/search?q=readable+code

Eigenvector isn't that bad, it's just not english:

"The prefix eigen- is adopted from the German word "eigen" for "own"[1] in the sense of a characteristic description" (from wikipedia)

I think Shannon's Information Theory is pretty fair too. It's about how much information is in a message.

Plus, Computer Science has it's own grievous names: A* search, B* search, B tree, B+ tree, B* tree. That always drove me nuts.

Re: Equations True Computer Science Geeks Should (at Least Pretend to) Know

#58

Post by abscondment »

king_magic wrote: post #32

Well, after 6 years of professional software engineering after finishing my BS in CS, the only things on that list that I've came anywhere close to using are the natural join and Demorgan's laws. I think this is a pretty silly post, to be honest. CS covers so much, and everytime I see a list of "things you should know", I have to resist the urge to roll my eyes and ignore it. But then I read it, and inevitably roll m…

I assume you overlooked O(n). You've probably used Bayes' theorem and the binomial coefficient, if only indirectly.

But I tend to agree with you: many of these are skewed by the author's perspective on what should be considered foundational. Someone doing webdev will not ever calculate eigenvectors. Someone doing machine learning will not be able to avoid them.

Re: Equations True Computer Science Geeks Should (at Least Pretend to) Know

#59

Post by rhizome »

tikhonj wrote: post #51
fragsworth wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can disagree all you want but it is pretty much objective fact that in practice, especially in the world of business, 99% of programming is not advanced at all. CS, which is not just programming, may be advanced, but you do not see the advanced concepts emerging very often in day-to-day programming.

However, the real question is whether there's no advanced stuff because of the domain or because of the people who work there. If enough people working at a company don't like advanced math, it means that they will not use it and if you use it, your code will be harder for them to maintain, so you don't use it either. I suspect if everybody had a better grasp of these ideas, you would see them used more often.

There are a ton of CS-trained programmers who will include advanced stuff whether the domain requires it or not. It's probably hard to have student loans hanging over your head and not have a reason to use most of the education they paid for.

Re: Equations True Computer Science Geeks Should (at Least Pretend to) Know

#60

Post by slowpoke »

king_magic wrote: post #39
mmaunder wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At two jobs now I've had a conversation with talented comp sci grads and we all agreed 99% of programming is drudgery and the 1% that requires you to turn off your music and sit in dead silence is rare and still not as challenging as comp sci syllabuses (syllabi?) would suggest. An unfortunate side-effect is that many people who could have become highly productive mid-level programmers are scared off because they don…

I disagree. Programming is math. Highly advanced math, in fact. It's just a different type of math. And the 11 equations in the OP's article just barely touches on what CS is about. There is far more to it than that.

No. Programming is logic, and logic is a superset of math. What you need to make good programs isn't some obscure, arcane language that the few who actually understand it (mathematicians) assert to be the universal answer to everything, yet refuse to make it more accessible (when it could be), what you need is logical thinking and the ability to think in abstractions.

Yes, studying math will teach you this, because - as mentioned - math is a subset of logic. But studying math by far is not the only way to gain these abilities, or to obtain a deeper understanding of CS problems.

This opinion alone will get (and has got) me branded as a heretic amongst many people, and that alone proves how deeply we are stuck in this tar-pit. If we want to get more people to be interested in and eventually deeply understand CS, we need to get rid of the math barrier. Math is a tool used by computer scientists, and not the fundamental basis of our field. Limiting yourself to a single tool is bad, and you don't need abstract algebra or calculus to understand this.

Post reply on HN