Software Engineering - Off topic Re: Iteration vs. Recursion

Author

Off topic Re: Iteration vs. Recursion

SM Ryan

2006-05-12, 9:59 pm

Apparently it is okay to go off topic if you are in the Elect.

"David Lightstone" <david._NoSpamlightstone@prodigy.net> wrote:
#
# "CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
# news:4463C372.DA1A0537@yahoo.com...
# > Richard Heathfield wrote:
# >> blmblm@myrealbox.com said:
# >>
# >>> Possibly, though, I wasn't clear -- I wasn't so much claiming that
# >>> we *do* turn out a few who might be useful (though I hope that's
# >>> true) as saying that we *should* turn out a few such, and asking
# >>> for stories that would make it clearer what to avoid.
# >>
# >> Well, for starters, either teach them how to program or tell them
# >> not to apply for programming jobs. :-)
# >>
# >> Seriously, it's not my place to teach you how to teach. But IF IT
# >> WERE, then I'd suggest the following:
# >>
# >> Make sure they have a thorough understanding of an abstract machine, to
# >> the
# >> extent that they can write non-trivial machine code programs in it. An
# >> 8-bit machine will be fine - 256 bytes of RAM ought to be enough for
# >> anybody. 16 bits if you're feeling astoundingly generous. Make sure it
# >> has
# >> a weird character collating sequence. I mean /really/ weird. (But keep
# >> '0'
# >> through '9' contiguous and ascending.) If you're feeling really pleasant,
# >> make it a two-byte machine with 11-bit bytes! Let them learn the meaning
# >> of
# >> the word "architecture" (or "agriculture", as we read in clc recently!).
# >>
# >> Set one of the really bright ones to write the machine code interpreter
# >> in
# >> something like C or C++; then make sure it works, fix it if need be, and
# >> use it forever afterwards for students to test their machine code
# >> programs
# >> on. Then get someone else bright to write an assembler and debugger for
# >> it.
# >>
# >> You're now in a position to teach programming at the dirty end - so make
# >> sure they all understand about stacks and heaps and how memory works and
# >> procedure calls, and so on ad nauseam. (Make sure they write enough
# >> machine
# >> code programs to get the idea, before you let them graduate to assembly
# >> language.)
# >>
# >> This doesn't have to be hugely in-depth, but I am sick and tired of
# >> teaching
# >> people what a pointer is, when they ought to KNOW what a pointer is.
# >> "Look,
# >> you want this function to update the pointer, right? So you ought to be
# >> passing a pointer-to-the-pointer into the function" + blank look = recipe
# >> for a police caution.
# >>
# >> Then, once they know all that, teach them programming from the clean end.
# >> :-) High level, in other words. You should find that they pick it up
# >> rather
# >> easily, because they understand what's going on underneath.
# >
# > But you would clutter their pristine young minds with all this
# > detail, when all they need to know is the abstract properties of an
# > operation! Something like teaching the basic definitions of a
# > limit (difference arbitrarily small as things approach arbitrarily
# > near, or we can find an epsilon such that, etc.) to budding
# > mathematicians. Or even that hot gases expand and urge pistons or
# > other things to move to budding automotive engineers.
# >
# > In all seriousness though, the fundamental teaching problem is when
# > and where to draw the line between detail and abstraction, and
# > persuade the student to choose the appropriate view.
#
# I thought Parnas resolved that circa the development innovation
# modularization / incapsulation / data hiding.
# Is a whole new bunch of programmers (and I know you are not one of them)
# rediscovering the square wheel?
#
#
# >The lack
# > today of simple but complete systems, such as were built around the
# > 8080, is a drawback. A stack is a detail, automatic storage is an
# > abstraction.
#
# I do not consider that necessary to learn about systems. Laszlos's book
# System View of the World will be adequate
#
#
# >
# > --
# > "If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
# > the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
# > "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
# > "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
# > More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>
# > Also see <http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/>
# >
# >
#
#
#
#

--
SM Ryan http://www.rawbw.com/~wyrmwif/
What kind of convenience store do you run here?

Richard Heathfield

2006-05-13, 4:00 am

SM Ryan said:

> Apparently it is okay to go off topic if you are in the Elect.

(a) The discussion is on-topic in, perhaps, three (maybe four) of the five
newsgroups that are carrying it, so I think your complaint is, to a certain
degree at least, rather misplaced.

(b) As somebody famous (Kaz?) once said, writing good, solid,
well-researched, interesting, helpful, *topical* articles for a newsgroup
is like putting florins (or dimes) in the bank - and indulging in off-topic
discussion is like taking out guineas (or dollars). Long-serving,
prolifically helpful, high-quality (and unpaid!) regulars earn a certain
(but by no means unlimited) amount of tolerance with regard to topicality.

(c) TINC.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)

CBFalconer

2006-05-13, 8:00 am

Richard Heathfield wrote:
> SM Ryan said:
>
>
> (a) The discussion is on-topic in, perhaps, three (maybe four) of
> the five newsgroups that are carrying it, so I think your complaint
> is, to a certain degree at least, rather misplaced.

I was shocked, shocked I tell you, to see Ryan and his fouled up
quotation markers together with top-posting appear on
comp.programming. I thought I had him plonked everywhere.

--
"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
"show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
"Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>
Also see <http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/>

Sponsored Links