|
Safe and Secure! posted:This all comes at the cost of: Did they cut CLRS?
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 15:35 |
|
|
Safe and Secure! posted:Accreditation and a "PE for software engineers" is not going to result in "better software engineering". My school switched their CS major to software engineering. The result was extra courses on: That's horrifying.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
karthun posted:Did they cut CLRS? The algorithms course was based on Klein and Tardos when I took it. What I found really gross was that one of the hiring managers at the company I interned at was actually really glad for the change. His view was that students that could only get into the state school would not be able to "get" computer science anyway, so it was better because this way they could get jobs doing test automation, since he couldn't find anyone willing to do it. Safe and Secure! fucked around with this message at 03:28 on Aug 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:21
|
|
|
Safe and Secure! posted:The algorithms course was based on Klein and Tardos when I took it. Thats a fine book, sad to see it go.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:28
|
|
uncurable mlady posted:down with slavery, aren't you a web dev anyway? Did all the PHP Engineers get phased out in favor of Node Samurai? I own a consulting firm that does all sorts of things but web development is where I started(ever made a website in Delphi? I remember when PHP looked mana from heaven). Node isn't really half as popular as reading hackernews might lead you to believe. The attitude towards titles in the community is largely "they are bullshit" and while I suspect there are a few assholes gloating about being an "engineer" to someone to make up for the fact that they dropped out of high school and just got a job dumping CSVs into SQL I doubt it's really that prolific of a phenomenon. From my experience people who care about titles are way less concerned with ensuring a high quality of work and much more concerned with ensuring that everyone suffers as much financial and time lost as they did.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:43
|
|
|
McAlister posted:That's horrifying. Why is that horrifying? I'd way rather programmers have some sort of toy experience with software design than having the same with computation theory (which isn't terribly useful in the general field beyond stuff like knowing big O notation and friends) or architecture. It also blows my mind how many people in this thread oppose programers' unions for reasons like workers not being interchangeable when both movies and sports are heavily unionized and also have measurable productivity differences for employees that the software field could never even dream of.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:47
|
|
|
Lyesh posted:Why is that horrifying? I'd way rather programmers have some sort of toy experience with software design than having the same with computation theory (which isn't terribly useful in the general field beyond stuff like knowing big O notation and friends) or architecture. I'm pretty sure I want the guy accredited to design the firmware on my car's breaks to have taken an algorithms course. If anyone should be taking algorithms, it should be that guy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
Safe and Secure! posted:Accreditation and a "PE for software engineers" is not going to result in "better software engineering". My school switched their CS major to software engineering. The result was extra courses on: Here's the topic of the Software PE btw. It is mainly focused on the fundamentals of the software engineering process rather than any specifics, which is probably for the best. Software: http://cdn1.ncees.co/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Exam-specifications_PE-Software-Apr-2013.pdf Computer: http://cdn4.ncees.co/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Exam-specifications_PE-Ele-Computer-Apr-2009.pdf
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:If a carpenter does a shoddy job when building a chair, it can put someone in danger and might even kill them. Shall we hold carpenters to the same standards we hold engineers? Carpenters don't make chairs, they make houses and they absolutely are required to be licensed and bonded.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Cheekio posted:I'm pretty sure I want the guy accredited to design the firmware on my car's breaks to have taken an algorithms course. If anyone should be taking algorithms, it should be that guy. If it makes you feel better it was probably written by an EE with no formal background in the theory of computation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
Lyesh posted:Why is that horrifying? I'd way rather programmers have some sort of toy experience with software design We already had two entire courses on software engineering, each involving term projects for which requirements specification, test plans, design documents, etc., had to be written according to various IEEE standards. Our senior software engineering course actually had us do this for two projects, one of which was not of our own choosing and had to be an extension to one of a few projects left behind by seniors from the previous year. I had at least four classes that involved taking codebases (of varying size, complexity, and quality) written by other people (of varying competency) and making it do something new, which had to be documented. It was already pretty "engineering"-focused. Trabisnikof posted:Here's the topic of the Software PE btw. It is mainly focused on the fundamentals of the software engineering process rather than any specifics, which is probably for the best. The one on "software" looks like it covers exactly what got drilled into us every other class from my junior year onward. I'm still not seeing why it's considered anything more than basic stuff. There should be some classes on it, sure, but there isn't really that much to cover.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:If it makes you feel better it was probably written by an EE with no formal background in the theory of computation. And to think he calls himself an engineer 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
Cheekio posted:And to think he calls himself an engineer Details on the Toyota case: http://www.edn.com/design/automotive/4423428/Toyota-s-killer-firmware--Bad-design-and-its-consequences hobbesmaster fucked around with this message at 04:10 on Aug 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
Safe and Secure! posted:The one on "software" looks like it covers exactly what got drilled into us every other class from my junior year onward. I'm still not seeing why it's considered anything more than basic stuff. There should be some classes on it, sure, but there isn't really that much to cover. To prove you know it? Isn't that the purpose of tests? I'm glad to hear you got a good education that put you in a position to potentially past the test. Good choice in university. Also, while the topics are pretty basic the questions can be a bit more complicated, especially on the PE.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 04:16
|
|
|
This came up on my Facebook earlier and I thought of this thread: 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Carpenters don't make chairs, they make houses and they absolutely are required to be licensed and bonded. You're totally and completely wrong.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
Fishmech at least reads the Wikipedia articles he links.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Fishmech at least reads the Wikipedia articles he links.  You said: quote:Carpenters don't make chairs, they make houses From the Wikipedia article you didn't read (and then blamed me for not reading), here are types of carpenters who don't make houses: quote:A finish carpenter (North America), also called a joiner (a traditional name now rare in North America), is one who does finish carpentry, that is, cabinetry, furniture making, fine woodworking, model building, instrument making, parquetry, joinery, or other carpentry where exact joints and minimal margins of error are important. Some large-scale construction may be of an exactitude and artistry that it is classed as finish carpentry.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
Safe and Secure! posted:Accreditation and a "PE for software engineers" is not going to result in "better software engineering". My school switched their CS major to software engineering. The result was extra courses on:  I'm not doing anything related to CS but this is horrifying. At least the school has the decency to call this bullshit something other than computer science.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 10:21
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
ed: nm
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 12:46
|
|
|
blowfish posted:
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 13:18
|
|
|
The programming community as a whole would be much better off without theoretical wankery like Turing Machines and much more attention paid to clarifying requirements, learning common anti-patterns and being skilled-up in basic business knowledge - because most programmers aren't developing new algorithms, they're working on maintaining the 5 millionth in-house implementation of SAP. e: actually the US could learn a lot from the Australian system - aside from one or two token "general studies" electives, an IT degree is spent focusing on IT, not irrelevant liberal arts classes. Of course that way you can't milk students extra $$ making them spend time on extra subjects. My Lil Parachute fucked around with this message at 13:24 on Aug 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 13:21
|
|
|
My Lil Parachute posted:e: actually the US could learn a lot from the Australian system - aside from one or two token "general studies" electives, an IT degree is spent focusing on IT, not irrelevant liberal arts classes. Of course that way you can't milk students extra $$ making them spend time on extra subjects. Some people believe that a broader variety of subjects studied in college can make you a more well-rounded person, of more benefit to society in general.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 13:25
|
|
|
Remind me, how many dollars is an average student paying to be more well-rounded?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 13:26
|
|
|
My Lil Parachute posted:As a general rule, if a discipline has 'science' in its name, it isn't. Well that certainly works for the Computer, Christian, and -tologist flavors.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 13:26
|
|
|
My Lil Parachute posted:The programming community as a whole would be much better off without theoretical wankery like Turing Machines and much more attention paid to clarifying requirements, learning common anti-patterns and being skilled-up in basic business knowledge - because most programmers aren't developing new algorithms, they're working on maintaining the 5 millionth in-house implementation of SAP. What does an IT degree have to do with a math degree (CS)?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 13:28
|
|
|
Sorry, I meant the education a typical software developer should take (as opposed to CS).
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 13:31
|
|
|
My take at answering the question posed by the OP: Programming is a field where a good programmer can easily be 10x as productive as a mediocre one. There is not much practical difference between a superb bus driver and an acceptable one. Bus drivers can be fairly easily replaced. A union benefits them as an individual has little bargaining power. Excellent programmers OTOH can make or break a project. If you are (or, as is the case most of the time, believe you are) better then 90% of your peers, why would you want to unionize? You don't want the same working conditions as the common riff-raff, you want the remuneration and respect you deserve.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 13:55
|
|
|
FamDav posted:so I think you should do things to try to stop it. I don't think you should do certain things. Maybe it's larger problem we (collectively) should try to fix for everybody? Let me tell you working for a non-profit that exists primarily to service it's mission and that distributes anything it makes to employees at the end of the year (after paying them well with good benefits) is loving great. Alternative structures to "get mine" are pretty great.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 14:37
|
|
|
Safe and Secure! posted:Accreditation and a "PE for software engineers" is not going to result in "better software engineering". My school switched their CS major to software engineering. The result was extra courses on: That's pretty bizarre. My university had both a B.Sc CompSci program, and a software engineering program, and the engineering program had pretty much everything the CS major program had, and a whole hell of a lot more. Consider the following: CS program: http://www.mcgill.ca/study/2012-2013/faculties/science/undergraduate/programs/bachelor-science-bsc-major-computer-science Software Engineering program: http://www.mcgill.ca/study/2012-2013/faculties/engineering/undergraduate/programs/bachelor-software-engineering-bse-software-engineering I think it's entirely fair (and legal, given the accreditation!) to call someone who's completed the latter "an engineer," and not so much with the former (I did the CS program; I don't call myself an engineer, because I'm not one). Frankly, it sounds like your school's new "engineering" program is basically what we already had for our CS program (though, in general, breadth requirements are different in Canada from the US, so we could easily include all the things you listed). My Lil Parachute posted:The programming community as a whole would be much better off without theoretical wankery like Turing Machines and much more attention paid to clarifying requirements, learning common anti-patterns and being skilled-up in basic business knowledge - because most programmers aren't developing new algorithms, they're working on maintaining the 5 millionth in-house implementation of SAP. We should probably make it so that CS grads know both what a Turing machine is, and the things you mention! As the curricula I've linked above show, they aren't mutually exclusive.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
My Lil Parachute posted:e: actually the US could learn a lot from the Australian system - aside from one or two token "general studies" electives, an IT degree is spent focusing on IT, not irrelevant liberal arts classes. Of course that way you can't milk students extra $$ making them spend time on extra subjects.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Why would the US want to learn this? I think it's good that students have to take classes outside their disciplines, especially in liberal arts which I think is being eschewed too hard in favor of stem. In the abstract however when you have to pay thousands of dollars to do it then you might get angry.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 15:31
|
|
|
Lyesh posted:Why is that horrifying? I'd way rather programmers have some sort of toy experience with software design than having the same with computation theory (which isn't terribly useful in the general field beyond stuff like knowing big O notation and friends) or architecture. I disagree as to the utility. Its less important nowadays I'll totally grant you since most frameworks have basic data structures baked in so you don't have to roll your own lists anymore or do things like decide to make them doubly linked or not etc. But I find that kind of knowledge to be highly correlated with coworkers who kick rear end. Whether they got it in school or are self taught the ones that have a basic understanding of low level concepts just do better at writing performant code, attacking problems from the direction that requires the least work, understanding threading (esp when not to do it), and not blaming the compiler/database when something weird happens. Also, you kind of need that stuff to write cool poo poo like heuristics engines so you can do things like tell if any data is "weird" or which emails are "spam" or hunt for fraud in health insurance claim databases ( which is going amazingly by the way. The money the ACA allocated to hire a bunch of programmers to write a heuristics engine to look for "weird" Medicare claims is paying off tenfold. =D ). quote:It also blows my mind how many people in this thread oppose programers' unions for reasons like workers not being interchangeable when both movies and sports are heavily unionized and also have measurable productivity differences for employees that the software field could never even dream of. There is a difference between "actively opposing" and "can't be bothered". Both movies and sports got unionized in the first place due to issues of workplace safety as I recall. If programmers were being asked to do our own stunts or play through injuries we'd have a reason to expend the time/effort to unionize. McAlister fucked around with this message at 15:58 on Aug 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 15:38
|
|
|
Buncha people from this thread post in this thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3564355 How is the middle man ecommerce web sales things going? What does it mean to find ones muse, when that muse is money for which you eventually try to do as little possible for? What is that? What does it look an awful lot like?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
Would people be interested in a cited effort post about an industry that used to pay what programmers get paid now, then abruptly got commoditized and wages/profits went promptly down the crapper at astounding speeds? I'll do it after work if so. Cause understanding why that industry was vulnerable will help explain why dev isn't vulnerable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 16:12
|
|
McAlister posted:Would people be interested in a cited effort post about an industry that used to pay what programmers get paid now, then abruptly got commoditized and wages/profits went promptly down the crapper at astounding speeds? Why don't you just tell us what the industry is instead of playing countdown to the reveal
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
My Lil Parachute posted:My take at answering the question posed by the OP: Programming is a field where a good programmer can easily be 10x as productive as a mediocre one. The best American football player in the world is paid tens of millions of dollars a year. The five-thousandth best is unemployed. Nobody in this thread is even close to being the five-thousandth best programmer in the world and yet they're paid upper-middle class salaries for the most part. Programming skill is nowhere NEAR as variable as athletic skill. Yet they still somehow manage to have strong unions. That said, I don't know that I want to see a programmers' union all that much because it's just going to empower the people in this thread who are all about Randian philosophy despite their surface rejections of it. Even if one formed, there's probably going to be little solidarity with any of the other workers in the world or even in the country.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
thathonkey posted:This came up on my Facebook earlier and I thought of this thread: Got to give them credit, at least they are teaching something that isn't going to disappear in 5 years or be flooded with mid-level developers like rails.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
Stanos posted:Got to give them credit, at least they are teaching something that isn't going to disappear in 5 years or be flooded with mid-level developers like rails. Thanks to all those mid level rails developers there is pretty much endless work for anyone who can fix those half-built rails 2.0 apps.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 15:35 |
|
|
down with slavery posted:Why don't you just tell us what the industry is instead of playing countdown to the reveal gotta protect my niche as a shitposter, you NAGGER
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2014 20:39
|
|
