News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:C for All by filereaper on Friday March 23, 2018 @03:33PM (#16661831)
As an alumni, I firmly believe there's room for a 4th year course in-addition to CS343. There's quite a lot in advanced control flow which can be covered.

I've always found it unfortunate that the university has courses from first year all the way to fourth year in Data Structures and Algorithms (all the way up to CS466/CS666) but Control Flow is treated like a secondary citizen.

Re:C for All by BruceIV on Friday March 23, 2018 @03:40PM (#16661900)
[also a CS 343 TA] I personally agree with you -- if it were up to me I'd refactor CS 343 into a pair of courses, maybe focusing on high-level concurrency constructs with a follow-up course on building that sort of runtime system.
Re:C for All by zodiac on Monday March 26, 2018 @08:33AM (#16678343)
I personally really hated the use of uC++ and would have loved to do the whole course in some MIPS dialect. I really liked how through most of second year the only language reference I really needed to look at fit on one piece of paper (https://www.student.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~cs241/mips/mipsref.pdf). The uC++ language, on the other hand, is not specified anywhere except in the enormous 600 page textbook, and even then very far from fully specified (e.g. there was a builtin function called rendezvous-something, where that string literally only appeared in the book once, and it was not defined at that place)
Re:C for All by filereaper on Monday March 26, 2018 @04:43PM (#16682396)
I'd argue that's the point of moving from a 2nd year course to a 3rd year one. You incrementally add more complexity. The ISO C++ spec is a similar heavy tome.