Assignment 2 countdown

I agree with Mel and that is exactly why I never registered for CEM101A

Tell me about it.. I nearly died laughing at their "fancy" name for cramp... I mean.. seriously....people must lift their game. I went to unisa with an A+, and a programming diploma and they wouldn't even credit me for anything.

But now, as a result, I did the first CEM101A assignment in just under 10 mins, and I haven't had a chance to look at any of the stuff again, and now it's becomming a concern, not because if the difficulty, but because of the time it takes to do 7 exams on top of all the serious subjects.

I've got an exam on Monday, then also in two weeks, after which I will see if I can just take out a week or so and do the entire course then, and write all 7 exams in 1 day... I gotta get this thing outa my hair.

-Valkeye

Brendonw,

I like the idea of creating my own libraries from early on, will definitaly put something together. Thanks

-Valkeye

I know that I must complete 14 modules to pass my first year, CEM101 is free credits for you guys so to speak, I opted for COS114 instead, introduction to visual programming, strangely it is not a compulsory subject to pass Level 1. It is very interresting thow, but a lot of work. Which streams are you guys into, I am in BCS software engenering.

I guess it makes sense not to include COS114 as a compulsory module 'cause graphic programming isn't really a concern in serious "computer science" - which is more about controlling complexity and processes (not to mention mathematical basis of computation etc.) - you don't need to know how to respond to an "onclick" event for that stuff ...

incedently, check out "structure and interpretation of computer programs" online, it's a wicked book (they use it for 1st year comp. sci. at MIT) - it'll give you a good idea of where we (should) be heading.

I'm not doing any particular stream, just adding another major to my degree.

I think a lot of OO Programmers would have a lot to say about that comment!

I'm doing the ITM stream, and COS114 is compulsory for me! I enjoy it, but find it so annoying because I'm a perfectionist so I spend so much time making sure my interfaces look right to me(buttons in the centre etc) even though no one ever sees them!

I'm currently in the Descision Modelling and Computing stream, but more than likely will change to Software Engineering.. That's where my passion is.. All this accounting is driving me mad.

Remember though that although C++ is probably one of the most powerful languages, the main language in industry would be Visual Basic, purely because the dev time is cut down so much by having a drag and drop environment for your forms. When I did JAVA dev it was amazing the amount of time wasted just developing your forms, having to worry about using layouts all the time.... or using co-ords.

-Valkeye

I am in the fruit export industry, we deal with farmers, now think about what farmers think of computers let alone programmes. Keep it simple, easy, understandible and graphical. Delphi does that perfectly, it allowed me to write a program " a simple " prgramme that saved our company thousands in the potencial lost of info in just an hour. Believe me the academic like UNISA and other institutions does not have a look clue what is happening in the industry. I am getting my tools from UNISA that is it, not to listen to what they have to say about the implementation, how and where to use those tools. That is my area of expertise.

So yes, lilumZA please think about what you said.

Hi Brendon (and Mel),

Perhaps you didn't read what I said?

Firstly, to answer Brendon's suggestion that I "please think about what said" - I would have to say the following.
If someone who was pursuing a physics degree asked "why don't they make "strength of materials" a compulsory course" I would have replied in exactly the same way. Sure, strength of materials is closely related to physics, and some people studying physics MAY take it as a subject, but is it essential to getting a solid (excuse the pun) education in physics, the answer would be no. You are obviously interested in computer science because of it's practical applications. I come to computer science from a completely different perspective (even though I am a software developer by profession).
Computer science has a strange history and it's sometimes difficult to differentiate between the tools we use (the p.c. for example) and WHAT it actually is we are studying when we undertake the study of computer science. What we are studying seems to be more about the evolution and structure of "procedual knowledge" (in oposition to declarative knowledge), as well as (among other things) the limits of computation as well as other things like the study of formal languages.
None of which really has to do with implementing solutions for clients.
You can be a computer scientist without ever having to touch a graphics library.
Unisa, with regards to (theoretical?) computer SCIENCE, doesn't need to have a clue as to what industry wants, because that would be like theoretical physicists having to keep abreast of the practices of the automotive industry.

I would be dissapointed if our curriculum focused on trivial things like implementing graphical applications. If you want that kind of thing there are short courses like the MCSD that should suffice.
It's a shame that there isn't a more clear cut distinction between computer science and software engineering (the latter is obviously what you are interested in, while the former is where my interest lies) - you imply that I am confused, but I said nothing about software engineering, I was speaking about computer science, which at it's base is a symbolic/mathematical science, regardless of it's pragmatic uses in business. In fact, if you think about it, knowing how to program a GUI app is really one of the more trivial parts of the construction phase of the SDLC - Anyone can pick up a manual for a GUI SDK and figure it out, not everyone can analyse the evolution of a process and figure out how to make it run better.

To Mel - Controlling complexity is exactly what OOP is about
Full OOP is not required for graphics programming (as anyone who has played with Win32 will readily attest) but it does make it easier.

Brendon.
I'm not trying to be antogonistic here - I hope you don't take it in that spirit - it's just that I don't like to be told that I haven't thought something through, what I wrote didn't deserve the sardonic remark it elicited. When I talk about computer science I mean the "thing" that Feynman was doing when he was working on Parellel processing algorithms at Los Almos, or the "thing" that Von Neumann was doing with analysing complexity (amongst other things). This (contrary to what you might think) is a Broader definition of computer science than a worrying-about trivia like GUI's (which any monkey can throw together with today's RAD tools).

Please don't conflate software engineering (and plain "programming" issues) and computer science and then tell me I'm confused (even though they ARE very tightly linked). That's a straw man right there. I'm not saying that the two are completely seperate, but that there is some kind of distinction.

Again, I'm just writing to set the record straight (at least about the definition of computer science I was using) and not to start a flame war.

So in short, lilumZA, you understand why we have a different approach to computer science. For me it is all about obtaining the necessary tools to help me in my day to day problem solving, to you it might seem trivial, but to me it is all about profit/loss at the end of the day.

And just to let you know, I studied physics at UWC 16 years ago and I am in this industry for the last 10 years now. So when I say it is important that you should include some learning tools in a course you should sit back and listen and consider the possibilities. Not that you should make it compulsory I understand, I see you still have the pure academic scholar approach in your way of thinking, those are things that I had to unlearn quickly in an ever growing industry where the competitive edge gets you ahead by using technology although trivial to the academics, but to the professional the possibilities are endless.

Hi,

Id like to give my 2c worth here as well.

I couldnt disagree more. The more and more the industry grows, the more and more programmers and programming technology will be used in complex areas. Your assertion that the academic methods need to be "unlearned" is the most ludicrous thing I have ever heard. It only took two really big software project to teach me that, if anything, one needs all the base core training one can get. It makes no difference to me if I am coding a project in C, C++, php, Java, Scheme, Perl, Delphi, or scripting the darn thing in BASH (maybe Id just not tell people if I had to use Delphi... jokes). The decisions that will effect the success of the program or project are completely unlinked with the choice of languages. Sure, choices like that might effect the time it takes to get a product to market (or boss or management), but those are engineering management issues and can be overcome by doing propper requirement analysis, once the "problem" has been solved.

Bear in mind that almost every piece of software has the potential to grow. People will want to integrate your systems with theirs at some stage, and making the right "academicaly qualified" decisions will mean the difference between costly rewrite and no costly rewrite (profit / loss perhaps?).

A good programmer will be able to design a piece of software that effectively handles complexity and scaling issues without ever refering to the language he/she is going to use. That, my friends, is computer science. Everything after that can be done by MCSD "grads" following a design spec, certain tribesmen from a small village in the tibettan mountains or well trained monkeys.

Coding is simple, programming slightly harder, but the truely challenging thing is the computer science. I most deffinately dont want to be just a coder for the rest of my life, and if you do, why are you bothering with any COS modules and this discussion?

Oh, and lastly, given two options A and B, A being jump in with tools and figure out how not to mess up by messing up and B being learn from 50 odd years of "Purely Academic Scholars", and limiting my chance for catastrophe, personally I choose B.


Anyhow, Good discussion guys. I suggest that everyone reading this makes up their own mind, and maybe reads up a bit on software engineering.

A great resource, as LillumZA pointed out, is Structure and interpretation of computer programs, by Abelson and Sussman. I have downloaded the video lecture series that they did, and I am really enjoying it. If anyone would like a copy, let me know. They are released under creative commons, so its all above board.



B

Hi Kensuke

Making decision like that, believe me you ,will not be made by a wet behind the ear fresh off the school bence graduate, but by your more senior staff, UNISA can not teach you experience, expereince is something that only time and exporsure in the particular industry can give you, unfortunately.

Send me a copy to brendonw@lona.co.za or adelevdv@adept.co.za(at home)
please.

Hi Brendon,

I'm not sure why you make the assumption that I'm somehow a "newbie" to the computer industry? I've been working in this industry for close on 10 years myself - that's kind of an arrogant and pretty insulting assumption on your part.
That's really a kind of "industry paternalism", it's better form to assume that you are speaking to equals or betters when on a forum like this (even if that's not the case, it's just good manners) - even a little child doesn't like to be told "because I'm older that you, that's why" (here I refer specifically to your line "I am in this industry for the last 10 years now. So when I say it is important that you should include some learning tools in a course you should sit back and listen and consider the possibilities"

The reason that I take an academic approach to computer science (or anything for that matter) is the exact same reason that you seem to be set against it. The speed at which the industry we are working in changes. If we learn delphi this year, 5 years later the lib's have changed. If we learn Java this year, 5 months later the new standard comes out and we have to relearn it (the libraries at least). If one understands basic first principles, that's something they can always build on. Algorithm analysis, limits of computation, Operating system design (even this has foundations that aren't implementation specific).
If you want to know what should be compulsory in a computer science major - it should all those things that you will still be using in 10 years.
Having a degree in physics, you should know better than anyone that a university degree is less about being productive in any particular industry than it is about getting an education, and an good university education will be about critical thought and analytical skills - rather than about gaining a skillset that will be outdated in 5 years.

Anyways, I really don't want this to degenerate into a petty argument - The reason the streams exist is to cater for everone's needs.
Id just like to point out that you were the one that was initially wondering why COS114 wasn't compulsory, I just thought I would say why I thought this was the case. You were the one who brought up that you are a programmer working in the agricultural sector and the I should think about what I am saying. I was trying to shed some light on a subject, you reacted to my comment by insinuating that I somehow didn't "get it" and that I should "think about what I'm saying" - scolding me for some naive opinion that I would grow out of when I actually entered the industry.

It's not your personal opinion that I find offensive - that, at least, you are entitled to. What I find repellent is the way you reacted to my posts, niether arguing nor conceding, merely (in both cases) making appeals to your own authority as an "old hand" in the industry. That is one of the most condecending forms of "argument".

Hi If you read what I said you will see that I did not assume that you are a "newbie" I just stated the fact that you still think like a scholar.

You said it as if it was part of a process - that I "STILL" think like a scholar/academic. Implying a kind of evolutionary process, something you reiterated right now - you just "stated the fact the still think like a scholar". What on earth can that mean other than it's something to grow out of?
If you had said "you think like a scholar" (without that condescending "still" that would have been fine.
You also went on to say that those are things you had to "unlearn" in order to survive in this ever growing industry.

When someone says, for example, "you still believe in God" or "you still believe in true love" - they say it in one of two ways. 1 - they say it in a laudatory way (in this context you have made it clear that this is not the case) or 2. they say it in a way that implies naivite.

Anyway, this is getting way out of hand. I'm sorry for getting so upset (and so verbose) but I feel very strongly about what university education should be about, and I really do feel that the focus on practice in many contemporary degrees (like that monstrosity the B.i.t.) is dumbing down people working in computers, something that started with the introduction of things like the MCSE, A+ etc (which I myself have, so I'm also insulting myself by saying that - it's not flamebait).

Again, I apologize for flying off the handle.

Hey there,

Im not entirely sure what decision you are refering to.

I am not saying all experience is invalid, what Im trying to say is that all experiance and no formal base training leads to crap programmers, and inevitably those crap programmers will stay around long enough and get promoted and then will become crap software designers. To extend the concept ad absurdum... That crap designer will then land a project where he codes a control system for an aircraft and unwittingly be the downfall of a small african coutry. Experience alone does not mean... as the common sayng goes, JACK. That being said, an purely academic qualification wont mean you are a good programmer, yet. I say yet because a graduate with no experience has potential. No core understanding of computer science and all the experience in the world has no potential (unless the potential for mayhem counts).

Look, personally I dont care what anyone else decides to do. The more crap point-and-shoot developers that are out there writing software and making a mess of it the better. Why you ask, Im a technical director for a software developemt company, thats why. The more disasters crap underqualified programmers can make, the more we get to go in a fix up.

Aut vincere aut mori. o tempora! o mores!
(either conquer or die. what times! what customs!)

lilumZA it is always interesting to hear fellow students views on things, especially when the views comes from different and diverse sources. Maybe there was some arrogance in some of my statements implying that you think like an academic. I apologise for my arrogance, but you certainly sound like someone from the academy profession. Remember I said "sound like" it is an observation, not an accusation .

Thanks Brendon.
Again I apologize for getting so uptight.

Wow guys, just reading all of your discussions, I feel completely out of my depth here! You obviously all have really extensive knowledge in all you respective fields - 10 years experience here, 10 years experience there!

I on the other have have absoltuely no experience whatsoever! This is my first delve into the computer science world, and right now, especially after reading the above posts, I'm feeling slightly overwhelmed!!

Hi guys

I am working half day today, so I am off will be back on Monday. Keep this forum alive, I have a file labeled "fellow students feedback" it forms an important part of my study material.

This is how much I value your input. I hope I can return the favour one day.