Application vs Theory of Programming/CS

Hi, nice board/beard you got there.

What do you guys think of the state of CS/programming in general and in academia?

Although SICP is great and such for theory and an intro to functional programming, yet it does not cover how code works on a machine code level basis.

Theoretical computer science has turned into a dumbed down version of selected theoretical mathematics minus the framework of electrical engineering that should be around it.

How many programmers that ``optimize'' their code, optimize it consciously thinking about how their code works on a circuit, diode, or resistor level of logic?

I don't see any use of companies like Intel or AMD releasing fancier and fancier shit if no one is even going to take full advantage of the new technological improvement that they are supplying.

Read SICP

Read Art of assembly

>>1
Theoretical computer science has turned into a dumbed down version of selected theoretical mathematics minus the framework of electrical engineering that should be around it.
The dumbing down, I believe, is an ongoing trend in education in general.
Sad state of affairs, that.

>>1
diode, or resistor level of logic?
That's nonsense for a clocked processor.

yet it does not cover how code works on a machine code level basis.
That's not its point. The point is about conjuring the spirits of the computer with spells. It's not a electronics lesson.

CS doesn't have anything to do with EE, and shouldn't. CS programs don't exist to train programmers, and they have no business teaching anyone to think about hardware when optimising code.
Precisely that attitude, that universities should be trade schools, is responsible for the complete disappearance of EE from CS programs, because for a programmer in training, there's a lot more value in learning how to work in teams and learning specific languages than there is in micro-optimisation and having a deep understanding of the hardware.

I'd rather have EE taint CS than the current Java school state of affairs, but don't pretend the disappearance of EE from CS is by itself a symptom of a decline of CS programs.

OP, clarify a bit more what exact “level“ you want to learn more about.
You wanna go into the electronical lever, or just how programs look like in native form?

>>8
OP
I'm not surprised reading a simple post is too much for you.

I'm inclined to say that education should be pushed further in that theoretical direction. CS students should be required to take more writing or literature classes. Learning to read and write well is probably more valuable to programmers in terms of both application and theory than learning some technical details about a specific hardware implementation.

>>10
I don't think you know anything about literature classes, or the meaning of the word ``theoretical''.

Don't change these.

Name:		Email:
Entire Thread Thread List