In article <slrnv15e4i.rk6.bencollver@svadhyaya.localdomain>,
Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> wrote:
>Is Programming Obsolete?
>========================
>Brian Harvey
>University of California, Berkeley

If you don't teach basic programming, you can't teach students what a
computer actually is.

If you don't teach assembler, you can't teach students how a computer
actually works.

You don't need to teach a fancy programming language or a giant assembler.
You don't even need to teach ones that are used in the real world because
the point isn't to give the student a marketable skill but to give him the
background where he can understand what a computer is and what it does.

You will find people in the IT community don't think teaching any of this
stuff is important, in part because they don't know what a computer is or
what it does.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in news:v1qem3$g2t$1@panix2.panix.com:

> In article <slrnv15e4i.rk6.bencollver@svadhyaya.localdomain>,
> Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> wrote:
>>Is Programming Obsolete?
>>========================
>>Brian Harvey
>>University of California, Berkeley
>
> If you don't teach basic programming, you can't teach students what a
> computer actually is.
>
> If you don't teach assembler, you can't teach students how a computer
> actually works.
>
> You don't need to teach a fancy programming language or a giant assembler.
> You don't even need to teach ones that are used in the real world because
> the point isn't to give the student a marketable skill but to give him the
> background where he can understand what a computer is and what it does.
>
> You will find people in the IT community don't think teaching any of this
> stuff is important, in part because they don't know what a computer is or
> what it does.
> --scott

Sad, but true.

AI is no substitute for being able to reason and express your own solutions.

Worse, recent 'college' grads don't want to do work and will take shortcuts
that create possibly hidden problems that an employer was willing to pay them
to use their knowlege to create a correct solution.

On Sun, 12 May 2024, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> In article <slrnv15e4i.rk6.bencollver@svadhyaya.localdomain>,
> Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> wrote:
>> Is Programming Obsolete?
>> ========================
>> Brian Harvey
>> University of California, Berkeley
>
> If you don't teach basic programming, you can't teach students what a
> computer actually is.
>
> If you don't teach assembler, you can't teach students how a computer
> actually works.
>
> You don't need to teach a fancy programming language or a giant assembler.
> You don't even need to teach ones that are used in the real world because
> the point isn't to give the student a marketable skill but to give him the
> background where he can understand what a computer is and what it does.
>
> You will find people in the IT community don't think teaching any of this
> stuff is important, in part because they don't know what a computer is or
> what it does.
> --scott
>

Let me add another perspective. Companies, influecing course programs,
don't want to waste time on fundamentals. They want programmers who can do
one nieche thing fast, as fast as possible, so no time to focus on the
basics.

D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>Let me add another perspective. Companies, influecing course programs,
>don't want to waste time on fundamentals. They want programmers who can do
>one nieche thing fast, as fast as possible, so no time to focus on the
>basics.

And this makes sense if you intend to only hire them for a couple years
and then dump them. If you're doing that, then hiring people who can
learn new systems quickly doesn't actually help you. Unfortunately this
policy has other problems but is very popular.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Sun, 12 May 2024 13:02:59 +0000, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> In article <slrnv15e4i.rk6.bencollver@svadhyaya.localdomain>,
> Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> wrote:
>>Is Programming Obsolete? ========================
>>Brian Harvey University of California, Berkeley
>
> If you don't teach basic programming, you can't teach students what a
> computer actually is.
>
> If you don't teach assembler, you can't teach students how a computer
> actually works.
>
> You don't need to teach a fancy programming language or a giant
> assembler.

Indeed. When I was doing my Master's, I saw undergraduates being taught
using a 'paper computer'. 16 words of RAM, 12 bit word. It was a set of
boxes with index cards with contents written on them. Plus a couple of
boxes for accumulator and flags. It was ctually a PDP-8 clone, but only
for simplicity.

--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

On Sun, 12 May 2024, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>
>> Let me add another perspective. Companies, influecing course programs,
>> don't want to waste time on fundamentals. They want programmers who can do
>> one nieche thing fast, as fast as possible, so no time to focus on the
>> basics.
>
> And this makes sense if you intend to only hire them for a couple years
> and then dump them. If you're doing that, then hiring people who can
> learn new systems quickly doesn't actually help you. Unfortunately this
> policy has other problems but is very popular.
> --scott
>

Spot on scott. That is the game plan as far as I can tell, sadly.

kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:

> In article <slrnv15e4i.rk6.bencollver@svadhyaya.localdomain>,
> Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> wrote:
>>Is Programming Obsolete?
>>========================
>>Brian Harvey
>>University of California, Berkeley
>
> If you don't teach basic programming, you can't teach students what a
> computer actually is.
>
> If you don't teach assembler, you can't teach students how a computer
> actually works.
>
> You don't need to teach a fancy programming language or a giant assembler.
> You don't even need to teach ones that are used in the real world because
> the point isn't to give the student a marketable skill but to give him the
> background where he can understand what a computer is and what it does.
>
> You will find people in the IT community don't think teaching any of this
> stuff is important, in part because they don't know what a computer is or
> what it does.

Precisely.

D <nospam@example.net> writes:

> On Sun, 12 May 2024, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
>> In article <slrnv15e4i.rk6.bencollver@svadhyaya.localdomain>,
>> Ben Collver <bencollver@tilde.pink> wrote:
>>> Is Programming Obsolete?
>>> ========================
>>> Brian Harvey
>>> University of California, Berkeley
>>
>> If you don't teach basic programming, you can't teach students what a
>> computer actually is.
>>
>> If you don't teach assembler, you can't teach students how a computer
>> actually works.
>>
>> You don't need to teach a fancy programming language or a giant assembler.
>> You don't even need to teach ones that are used in the real world because
>> the point isn't to give the student a marketable skill but to give him the
>> background where he can understand what a computer is and what it does.
>>
>> You will find people in the IT community don't think teaching any of this
>> stuff is important, in part because they don't know what a computer is or
>> what it does.
>> --scott
>
> Let me add another perspective. Companies, influecing course programs,
> don't want to waste time on fundamentals. They want programmers who
> can do one nieche thing fast, as fast as possible, so no time to focus
> on the basics.

In other words, bring me profits, forget yourself and the the world.

Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> wrote:
>
>Indeed. When I was doing my Master's, I saw undergraduates being taught
>using a 'paper computer'. 16 words of RAM, 12 bit word. It was a set of
>boxes with index cards with contents written on them. Plus a couple of
>boxes for accumulator and flags. It was ctually a PDP-8 clone, but only
>for simplicity.

Bell Labs used to sell a paper card thing called the CARDIAC which was
vaguely like this, and the US Army training folks had a thing called TAGSAC
which was a paper computer for teaching programming in the days when
computers were too expensive to waste on students.

But these days you can buy an ST evaluation board that plugs into your PC
and has a marvelous 8-bit instruction set. It even has a divide! Take that,
8051.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Mon, 13 May 2024 13:10:35 +0000, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Bob Eager <news0009@eager.cx> wrote:
>>
>>Indeed. When I was doing my Master's, I saw undergraduates being taught
>>using a 'paper computer'. 16 words of RAM, 12 bit word. It was a set of
>>boxes with index cards with contents written on them. Plus a couple of
>>boxes for accumulator and flags. It was ctually a PDP-8 clone, but only
>>for simplicity.
>
> Bell Labs used to sell a paper card thing called the CARDIAC which was
> vaguely like this, and the US Army training folks had a thing called
> TAGSAC which was a paper computer for teaching programming in the days
> when computers were too expensive to waste on students.
>
> But these days you can buy an ST evaluation board that plugs into your
> PC and has a marvelous 8-bit instruction set. It even has a divide!
> Take that,
> 8051.

The great thing about the one with index cards is that it came out of the
stationery budget!

--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

Bob Eager:

> Indeed. When I was doing my Master's, I saw undergraduates
> being taught using a 'paper computer'. 16 words of RAM, 12
> bit word. It was a set of boxes with index cards with
> contents written on them. Plus a couple of boxes for
> accumulator and flags. It was ctually a PDP-8 clone, but
> only for simplicity.

This reminds of a great site absolutely on-topic here:

<https://wiki.xxiivv.com/site/research.html>
and especially:
<https://wiki.xxiivv.com/site/paper_computing.html>

--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> wrote at 17:31 this Monday (GMT):
> Bob Eager:
>
>> Indeed. When I was doing my Master's, I saw undergraduates
>> being taught using a 'paper computer'. 16 words of RAM, 12
>> bit word. It was a set of boxes with index cards with
>> contents written on them. Plus a couple of boxes for
>> accumulator and flags. It was ctually a PDP-8 clone, but
>> only for simplicity.
>
> This reminds of a great site absolutely on-topic here:
>
> <https://wiki.xxiivv.com/site/research.html>
> and especially:
> <https://wiki.xxiivv.com/site/paper_computing.html>

Interesting, I'd never heard of that.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom