Re:Stroustrup: What Should We Teach New Software Developers?
by dinkumthinkum on Wednesday December 23, 2009 @10:54AM
(#1012227)
I think that's just going too far. I think the analogy to a Physics professor never building a bridge is a bit silly. You might as well say a "Physics professor that never swims or enjoys a warm breeze on a hot summer's day."
A Computer Science theoretician's work is somewhat more closely tied to programming. I mean, let's be serious.
Re:Stroustrup: What Should We Teach New Software Developers?
by ephermata on Wednesday December 23, 2009 @11:16AM
(#1012270)
What do you have in mind when you say "computer science theoretician" ? Do you mean someone who publishes in the ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing or do you mean something else?
Re:Stroustrup: What Should We Teach New Software Developers?
by scott_s on Thursday December 24, 2009 @01:50AM
(#1013523)
Regarding computer science as a discipline, please read:
Linguistics is the study of language, but CS at its core is the study of algorithms and theory. A CS prof never coding is more akin to a Physics professor never designing his own bridge. Sure, he technically could if he wanted to, but that's probably still better left to the engineers.
Dijkstra said (rightly, IMO) "Computer science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes." I think a corollary to that is that it's also not about programming/coding per se, but the theoretical study of techniques we use when building programs.