<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 12 Bonehead Misconceptions of Computer Science Professors</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thewaronbullshit.com/2009/10/19/compsci/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thewaronbullshit.com/2009/10/19/compsci/</link>
	<description>Take no prisoners</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2011 18:23:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jake</title>
		<link>http://thewaronbullshit.com/2009/10/19/compsci/comment-page-2/#comment-1766</link>
		<dc:creator>Jake</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 17:50:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewaronbullshit.com/?p=373#comment-1766</guid>
		<description>&quot;The same idiot who thought LaTeX was the future also told his class to go buy gates (the things transistors are made of) at RadioShack and play with them to see how they work. Again, this evidences how completely out of touch some of these people are. Gates are microscopic. You can&#039;t go buy them at an electronics store.&quot;

What!? I&#039;m sorry, transistors are made of gates? lol This guy obviously never took a real hardware course in his life. If you can&#039;t buy them at the store then what in the hell is the Ti 7400 series!?

He makes a couple of decent points but its shrouded with bag grammar and personal biasing. This guy sounds like some kind of code monkey that would be better suited for technical school and not a real University.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The same idiot who thought LaTeX was the future also told his class to go buy gates (the things transistors are made of) at RadioShack and play with them to see how they work. Again, this evidences how completely out of touch some of these people are. Gates are microscopic. You can&#8217;t go buy them at an electronics store.&#8221;</p>
<p>What!? I&#8217;m sorry, transistors are made of gates? lol This guy obviously never took a real hardware course in his life. If you can&#8217;t buy them at the store then what in the hell is the Ti 7400 series!?</p>
<p>He makes a couple of decent points but its shrouded with bag grammar and personal biasing. This guy sounds like some kind of code monkey that would be better suited for technical school and not a real University.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Body Shapers</title>
		<link>http://thewaronbullshit.com/2009/10/19/compsci/comment-page-2/#comment-1744</link>
		<dc:creator>Body Shapers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 May 2011 22:22:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewaronbullshit.com/?p=373#comment-1744</guid>
		<description>Python should be the first language taught, very easy to learn.

As much as I try to get rid of Windows I always go back, I love linux but I don&#039;t know if will ever be good for the regular user.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Python should be the first language taught, very easy to learn.</p>
<p>As much as I try to get rid of Windows I always go back, I love linux but I don&#8217;t know if will ever be good for the regular user.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aphotic</title>
		<link>http://thewaronbullshit.com/2009/10/19/compsci/comment-page-2/#comment-1726</link>
		<dc:creator>Aphotic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Apr 2011 05:54:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewaronbullshit.com/?p=373#comment-1726</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve bought some AND and OR and NOT gate chips at RadioShack last semester.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve bought some AND and OR and NOT gate chips at RadioShack last semester.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kavan Wolfe</title>
		<link>http://thewaronbullshit.com/2009/10/19/compsci/comment-page-2/#comment-1719</link>
		<dc:creator>Kavan Wolfe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2011 17:04:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewaronbullshit.com/?p=373#comment-1719</guid>
		<description>@Ash,

C++ to Java and other object-oriented or scripting languages isn&#039;t so bad, but try Prolog and LISP.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Ash,</p>
<p>C++ to Java and other object-oriented or scripting languages isn&#8217;t so bad, but try Prolog and LISP.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ash</title>
		<link>http://thewaronbullshit.com/2009/10/19/compsci/comment-page-2/#comment-1716</link>
		<dc:creator>Ash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Mar 2011 13:31:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewaronbullshit.com/?p=373#comment-1716</guid>
		<description>I agree with everything except point 6, I found that after I learned C++ I could pick up nearly any language quite easily.

I know a kid studying CS now and he is having issues with binary and I told him that he doesn&#039;t need to really know that just get past it and forget it, it is redundant to modern Programmers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with everything except point 6, I found that after I learned C++ I could pick up nearly any language quite easily.</p>
<p>I know a kid studying CS now and he is having issues with binary and I told him that he doesn&#8217;t need to really know that just get past it and forget it, it is redundant to modern Programmers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin</title>
		<link>http://thewaronbullshit.com/2009/10/19/compsci/comment-page-2/#comment-1713</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 23:21:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewaronbullshit.com/?p=373#comment-1713</guid>
		<description>Programmer here. As in passionate, obsessed, want to make new software do amazing stuff programmer not the lately seen stereotype of &quot;oh i heard it&#039;s well payed, i want to be a programmer&quot;. In any case, there is nothing i would love more than to see some proper IT teachers in Universities, especially in the Programming courses.

Just as a small insider, in my university (which shall remain unnamed) our VB.NET programming teacher is such a bloody genius he wrote in nice big font on the projector Dim Integer as Integer and couldn&#039;t figure out what the problem was for about half an hour. 

But when i wrote a string to 7-bit octet text conversion function (the one used to convert string to SMS PDU format) i got a 60 in my report because, and i quote &quot;you did not use arrays in your code&quot;. Then what the bloody hell do you consider a string when i refer to it with brackets (or parentheses in the case of VB) .... IDIOT!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Programmer here. As in passionate, obsessed, want to make new software do amazing stuff programmer not the lately seen stereotype of &#8220;oh i heard it&#8217;s well payed, i want to be a programmer&#8221;. In any case, there is nothing i would love more than to see some proper IT teachers in Universities, especially in the Programming courses.</p>
<p>Just as a small insider, in my university (which shall remain unnamed) our VB.NET programming teacher is such a bloody genius he wrote in nice big font on the projector Dim Integer as Integer and couldn&#8217;t figure out what the problem was for about half an hour. </p>
<p>But when i wrote a string to 7-bit octet text conversion function (the one used to convert string to SMS PDU format) i got a 60 in my report because, and i quote &#8220;you did not use arrays in your code&#8221;. Then what the bloody hell do you consider a string when i refer to it with brackets (or parentheses in the case of VB) &#8230;. IDIOT!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fajas colombianas</title>
		<link>http://thewaronbullshit.com/2009/10/19/compsci/comment-page-2/#comment-1712</link>
		<dc:creator>fajas colombianas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:16:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewaronbullshit.com/?p=373#comment-1712</guid>
		<description>Java isn&#039;t really a good first taught programming language, I mean why do we have to put those public static void main in there anyways.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Java isn&#8217;t really a good first taught programming language, I mean why do we have to put those public static void main in there anyways.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kavan Wolfe</title>
		<link>http://thewaronbullshit.com/2009/10/19/compsci/comment-page-1/#comment-1711</link>
		<dc:creator>Kavan Wolfe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 13:15:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewaronbullshit.com/?p=373#comment-1711</guid>
		<description>Thanks to everyone who left a comment. To fully understand the perspective of this article, one needs awareness of the paradox at the heart of computer science. Each year, western society requires hundreds of thousands of new software developers, and only a few thousand new computer scientists. Unfortunately, there are very few software engineering programs, so most students who want to become developers take computer science. However, the people who control the computer science programs are largely computer scientists, not software developers. This results in a fundamental mismatch between what society needs and what these programs deliver.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks to everyone who left a comment. To fully understand the perspective of this article, one needs awareness of the paradox at the heart of computer science. Each year, western society requires hundreds of thousands of new software developers, and only a few thousand new computer scientists. Unfortunately, there are very few software engineering programs, so most students who want to become developers take computer science. However, the people who control the computer science programs are largely computer scientists, not software developers. This results in a fundamental mismatch between what society needs and what these programs deliver.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Lind</title>
		<link>http://thewaronbullshit.com/2009/10/19/compsci/comment-page-1/#comment-1708</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Lind</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 10:07:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewaronbullshit.com/?p=373#comment-1708</guid>
		<description>First of, I am a computer science instructor, so I might be more than a little biased.

You touch on some interessting points, but are not quite right in all of them. Let me take your &quot;misconceptions&quot; one at a time.

1. Java - you are absolutely right, Java is a complicated first language. Python og Ruby would be better to learn about variables and programflow. However Java is much better than C or C++, and it has an immediate &quot;real-world&quot; feeling, since the students can actually see it being used and requested by the industry.

2. Machine Language - when we say that it is &quot;basic&quot;, or low-level, we mean from the computers point of view, not from the students. Machine Language is the basic &quot;workhorse&quot; in the computer, whereas high-level languages have to be compiled or interpreted. High-level are however easier to learn for humans ... 

3. Write code on paper - I&#039;ve seen other instructors make this mistake too. The idea is that you write your program, not your code, on paper before sitting in front of the machine. Working with paper allows you to design your program, to think about the algorithm without all the nitty-gritty of the language you use. Experienced programmers can do it in their heads, or in comments, but students need yo use paper. Unfortunately some instructors seem to think that you need to write compilable code on paper, and that is indeed a bonehead misconception.

4. Lectures - you are absolutely right, you can only learn programming by programming.

5. Algorithm design - hmm, well, it IS a good idea to learn to read existing code, and to understand how they solve their problems. But it certainly isn&#039;t for beginners.

6. Picking up other languages - I kind of agree. While it is informative to show students that they can learn a new language using the same principles they have already learned once, it always ends in confusion. In the long term you will pick this up by yourselves.

7. Exams - yeah, they are problematic, but we need some way to measure your individual understanding of the area. I would love to see some changes there, but haven&#039;t the faintest idea as how it could be done better.

8. GUIs are tools of the API - like working with filesystems, XML, databases, encryption, sound, threads, networking etc. It is not part of learning to program, and it requires more learning a specific API, than learning basic theory, and I guess that is why it is often left to specialty courses. I would like to spend more time on GUI-programming, but it requires that you first understand basic programming, algorithm design, program flow, multithreading and event-controlled programmming.

9. Calculus - you are right, it doesn&#039;t. Programming doesn&#039;t require any specific math-skills, it only requires that you are logical and systematic - traits often seen in higher mathematics, but the connection between high-school math and programming is a nuisance that I would like to get rid of.

10 and 11 sounds like personal opinions, like whether Mac or Windows is best, and whether everyone should use Open Office or some other system. It is an endless debate, and no one is correct.

12. You are mistaken - or your professor has taught you poorly. Gates are built from transistors, and you can buy integrated circuits with four NAND, EXOR, AND og OR gates in them, and play around with at home. Boolean logic and how it is implemented in electronic circuits are a very important aspect of computer science, but maybe not so much in programming.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First of, I am a computer science instructor, so I might be more than a little biased.</p>
<p>You touch on some interessting points, but are not quite right in all of them. Let me take your &#8220;misconceptions&#8221; one at a time.</p>
<p>1. Java &#8211; you are absolutely right, Java is a complicated first language. Python og Ruby would be better to learn about variables and programflow. However Java is much better than C or C++, and it has an immediate &#8220;real-world&#8221; feeling, since the students can actually see it being used and requested by the industry.</p>
<p>2. Machine Language &#8211; when we say that it is &#8220;basic&#8221;, or low-level, we mean from the computers point of view, not from the students. Machine Language is the basic &#8220;workhorse&#8221; in the computer, whereas high-level languages have to be compiled or interpreted. High-level are however easier to learn for humans &#8230; </p>
<p>3. Write code on paper &#8211; I&#8217;ve seen other instructors make this mistake too. The idea is that you write your program, not your code, on paper before sitting in front of the machine. Working with paper allows you to design your program, to think about the algorithm without all the nitty-gritty of the language you use. Experienced programmers can do it in their heads, or in comments, but students need yo use paper. Unfortunately some instructors seem to think that you need to write compilable code on paper, and that is indeed a bonehead misconception.</p>
<p>4. Lectures &#8211; you are absolutely right, you can only learn programming by programming.</p>
<p>5. Algorithm design &#8211; hmm, well, it IS a good idea to learn to read existing code, and to understand how they solve their problems. But it certainly isn&#8217;t for beginners.</p>
<p>6. Picking up other languages &#8211; I kind of agree. While it is informative to show students that they can learn a new language using the same principles they have already learned once, it always ends in confusion. In the long term you will pick this up by yourselves.</p>
<p>7. Exams &#8211; yeah, they are problematic, but we need some way to measure your individual understanding of the area. I would love to see some changes there, but haven&#8217;t the faintest idea as how it could be done better.</p>
<p>8. GUIs are tools of the API &#8211; like working with filesystems, XML, databases, encryption, sound, threads, networking etc. It is not part of learning to program, and it requires more learning a specific API, than learning basic theory, and I guess that is why it is often left to specialty courses. I would like to spend more time on GUI-programming, but it requires that you first understand basic programming, algorithm design, program flow, multithreading and event-controlled programmming.</p>
<p>9. Calculus &#8211; you are right, it doesn&#8217;t. Programming doesn&#8217;t require any specific math-skills, it only requires that you are logical and systematic &#8211; traits often seen in higher mathematics, but the connection between high-school math and programming is a nuisance that I would like to get rid of.</p>
<p>10 and 11 sounds like personal opinions, like whether Mac or Windows is best, and whether everyone should use Open Office or some other system. It is an endless debate, and no one is correct.</p>
<p>12. You are mistaken &#8211; or your professor has taught you poorly. Gates are built from transistors, and you can buy integrated circuits with four NAND, EXOR, AND og OR gates in them, and play around with at home. Boolean logic and how it is implemented in electronic circuits are a very important aspect of computer science, but maybe not so much in programming.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TP</title>
		<link>http://thewaronbullshit.com/2009/10/19/compsci/comment-page-1/#comment-1707</link>
		<dc:creator>TP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 05:40:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewaronbullshit.com/?p=373#comment-1707</guid>
		<description>Wow, you stepped on a lot of toes!
Nice job!
I&#039;ve seen people learn to code so many different ways
its not funny. Teachers are always comfortable with a book
and an approved method, it freaks them out to learn some kid hacker
can out code them. But coding is so easily learned by way of the internet
that any interested halfway intellegent person can learn it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, you stepped on a lot of toes!<br />
Nice job!<br />
I&#8217;ve seen people learn to code so many different ways<br />
its not funny. Teachers are always comfortable with a book<br />
and an approved method, it freaks them out to learn some kid hacker<br />
can out code them. But coding is so easily learned by way of the internet<br />
that any interested halfway intellegent person can learn it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

