Stanford dumps Java as introductory class
-
@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@dkf said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
What's unintuitive about “Read-Evaluate-Print Loop”? (“REPL” is just shorthand.)
The computer's not reading anything. Evaluate-- ok fair enough. There's no printer involved. There's no loop involved (unless you write one).
It Reads the line you entered, Evaluates it, Prints the result to the console window, and Loops back to waiting for input.
Simple.
-
@dreikin I suppose it goes to the difference between a university and a vocational school. A vocational school teaches how to do something, whereas a university teaches how to think.
-
@greybeard said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@dreikin I suppose it goes to the difference between a university and a vocational school. A vocational school teaches how to do something, whereas a university teaches how to think.
I was thinking more like the difference between an introductory/elective class and a majoring-in-it class at a liberal arts university/college. Using a language/tool kit that is in actual usage doesn't preclude using it to teach how to think in the relevant fashion. It just means the non-majors are more likely to be able to make use of those new topic-specific thinking skills once they're done with the class. And moreover, that they'll have an opportunity to even learn those skills at all instead of getting inappropriately "weeded out" from a major they never intended to go into anyway, or scared off because of reputation.
-
@raceprouk said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
It Reads the line you entered,
Computers don't read. Parse maybe. Certainly not read.
@raceprouk said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
Prints the result to the console window,
No printing is involved in that. Drawing, perhaps. Not printing.
@raceprouk said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
and Loops back to waiting for input.
That's a use of the word "loop" that I've never seen in software development before. Try telling a neophyte programmer than it "loops back", they'll have about 47 questions related to that.
I'm not saying Microsoft's term is any better, but the only people who think "REPL" is good are those people who've had their heads in computer programming so long they no longer have the capacity to empathize with normal human beings.
-
@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
Computers don't read. Parse maybe. Certainly not read.
Nothing goes over your head, for your reflexes are too fast and you would catch it.
-
@Dreikin I suppose they should teach it in Excel macros then.
There's a trade-off for what should be the best use of the available time. There's the cost of dealing with the actual-use language's syntax and other issues while trying to pick up the thinking skills versus the cost of learning the language once the skills have already been acquired.
And no doubt the useful languages were more dire in my day.
-
@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@dkf said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
What's unintuitive about “Read-Evaluate-Print Loop”? (“REPL” is just shorthand.)
The computer's not reading anything. Evaluate-- ok fair enough. There's no printer involved. There's no loop involved (unless you write one).
Plus REPL sounds like a sick bullfrog.
Does that cover the bases?
It actually reminds me of the old joke about how the "Union of Socialist Soviet Republics" isn't any of those things, except perhaps a "Soviet" because nobody knows what that is.
That's...dumb. But I won't repeat what @Luhmann already said.
-
@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
Computers don't read. Parse maybe. Certainly not read.
You just want people to call you fucking stupid so you can whine about it, don't you?
@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
That's a use of the word "loop" that I've never seen in software development before. Try telling a neophyte programmer than it "loops back", they'll have about 47 questions related to that.
Holy shit...this is even dumber, because it gives the impression that you don't know what a loop is at all.
@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
I'm not saying Microsoft's term is any better, but the only people who think "REPL" is good are those people who've had their heads in computer programming so long they no longer have the capacity to empathize with normal human beings.
What would you know about normal human beings? Yeah, it's an acronym, and I think MS's term is fine, but I can only conclude that you are trolling or are too stupid to breathe, based on this post.
-
@boomzilla Oh good, abuse. Thank you.
Look, every time you respond to my posts, it's to call me stupid. Why don't we just take it as a given that you think I'm stupid and we can skip the whole ceremony?
Maybe you could have your own thoughts and opinions you could communicate, instead of just following me around and saying all mine are stupid. That's a thought.
-
@yamikuronue said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@khudzlin said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
I get that the first number is the year, but what's the difference between 101, 102, 103 and so on?
100- level is for freshmen. Then they're just in catalog order. So like at one of my alma maters, you had:
MAT 112: Contemporary topics in Mathematics
MAT 115: College Algebra
MAT 120: Business calculus (Calculus as a final math course for business folks)
MAT 150: Precalc 1
MAT 151: Precalc 2
MAT 191: Calc 1This is all because you were expected to take precalc in high school, but many students didn't, so they have to catch up at the college level. At the 200 level there's
MAT 253: Mathematical structures, which is taught in Python
MAT 292: Calc 2
MAT 293: Calc 3et cetera.
Unlike what popular media would have you believe, you don't actually get "Basket-weaving 101, Basket-weaving 102"; you get something like "ART 115 Basket Weaving 1, ART 116 Basket Weaving 2": a department, then a number, then a title of the course.
HTH.
Unless you actually have a basketweaving department.
At a full scale research university the departmental granularity can get amusing sometimes.
And some institutions are lately reformatting their catalog so things are named for the program or subject matter to which they relate, rather than the department overseeing them. Wherein basketweaving 100 (remedial basket weaving) is perfectly valid.
-
@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
Look, every time you respond to my posts, it's to call me stupid.
Largely, yes.
@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
Maybe you could have your own thoughts and opinions you could communicate, instead of just following me around and saying all mine are stupid. That's a thought.
It's kind of dumb (no surprise there!), since I do a lot of that, too.
-
@raceprouk said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
The design of a language and the implementation of a language are distinct issues
And this distinction rarely matter
-
@masonwheeler said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@sh_code That's one of the points Joel makes in the article I linked: intro to CS classes are supposed to be difficult, with the express purpose of weeding out those who don't have the mental flexibility to make it as successful programmers.
What about the people that enter CS to be business analysts, project managers, and whatnot?
-
@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
Computers don't read
Console.Read()
disagrees. It's a fairly standard metaphor@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
That's a use of the word "loop" that I've never seen in software development before
The whole thing is a loop
while(true) { read(); eval(); print(); }
But yeah, REPL isn't a great name for people who don't already know what it is
-
@wharrgarbl said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
What about the people that enter CS to be business analysts, project managers, and whatnot?
Then they chose the wrong thing.... (also, 99.9% of university courses in CS have nothing to do with the "Science of Computers")
-
@thecpuwizard The "High Priesthood of Technology" is alive and well.
-
@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
The "High Priesthood of Technology" is alive and well
In the Temples of Cyrix
-
@raceprouk said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
Temples of Cyrix
Huh?
Wait... do you mean "syrinx"? Are you making a Rush reference!?!?
Rush - 2112: The Temples Of Syrinx (Lyric Video) – 02:12
— RushVEVOYesssss.
-
@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@thecpuwizard The "High Priesthood of Technology" is alive and well.
How about addressing the post itself instead of ad hominin replies???
-
@jaloopa said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
The whole thing is a loop
while(true) { read(); eval(); print(); }
But yeah, REPL isn't a great name for people who don't already know what it is
The truly weird thing is, if you wrote it out, it would be more like:
loop(print(eval(read())));
(Yes,
loop
is a function in Lisp.)Therefore, REPL is backwards. It should be LPER. Maybe it should be pronounced "leper," which is indicative of Lisp's popularity.
-
@thecpuwizard said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
How about addressing the post itself instead of ad hominin replies???
Thats .... not his strength.
-
@gwowen said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
Thats .... not his strength.
I know :) :) [That's what makes it so much fun ;) ]
-
@thecpuwizard said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@thecpuwizard The "High Priesthood of Technology" is alive and well.
How about addressing the post itself instead of ad hominin replies???
He could, but it'd be stupid.
-
@boomzilla said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
He could, but it'd be stupid
So you think that:
a) People taking purported CS classes when they are not going to be doing CS - and expecting it to help their career.
b) Universities purporting classes to be CS when they are most often AppDev helps students.I think both of these are poor practices, and that is what I posted.
Which part of a reply to this would be inherently stupid?
-
@thecpuwizard said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@boomzilla said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
He could, but it'd be stupid
So you think that:
a) People taking purported CS classes when they are not going to be doing CS - and expecting it to help their career.
b) Universities purporting classes to be CS when they are most often AppDev helps students.I think both of these are poor practices, and that is what I posted.
I agree.
Which part of a reply to this would be inherently stupid?
I have faith in Blakey. He always finds a way.
Actually, he probably agrees with those, based on previous posts. But's that's just my wild ass-guess. I'm not a mind reader or anything.
-
@masonwheeler said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
The truly weird thing is, if you wrote it out, it would be more like:
loop(print(eval(read())));
ITYM
(loop(print(eval(read))))
After all, it is Lisp…
-
@dkf I think we can all agree that as long as it doesn't come out as Print-Eval-Read Loop (PERL) we'll probably be ok
-
@gwowen now we know how come it is a write only language :D
-
Sounds like Stanford's CS program is being retooled to produce low-paying keyboard monkeys who will create Yet Another Goddamned JavaScript Library(tm). Because we clearly don't have enough of those in the world, and no one uses desktops anymore.
-
@gwowen said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@dkf I think we can all agree that as long as it doesn't come out as Print-Eval-Read Loop (PERL) we'll probably be ok
Knowing some of the annoying syntax that Perl allows, writing it in that order would probably still work.
-
@the_quiet_one said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@boomzilla said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@raceprouk said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@jaloopa said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
The lecturer. Apparently generics were considered too complicated for an introductory course.
Seriously? It's not like generics in C# are complicated. Does she also recommend using
x = x + 1;
instead ofx++;
?That's a tragedy. Obviously should be teaching
++x;
instead ofx++;
.Wrong. It's
const ONE = 2; // bug 42: need to inc by 2. x += ONE;
FBHIC
-
@sh_code said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@blakeyrat said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
A better question: why the fuck am I debating with a person who doesn't even own a shift key?
Oh Look. A Shift Key! And All It Took For Me To Find It Was One Boring Ad-Hominem! ;) :-*
Fail. Get your shift right! Shift is a shift key!
-
@anonymous234 said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
Why not just give us a "facial expression editor" and let us create our own ones?
mspaint.exe?
-
@dcon said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@anonymous234 said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
Why not just give us a "facial expression editor" and let us create our own ones?
mspaint.exe?
Deprecated!
There are "drawing" widgets you can embed on websites though... it could be fun if we put one here.
-
@anonymous234 said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@dcon said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
@anonymous234 said in Stanford dumps Java as introductory class:
Why not just give us a "facial expression editor" and let us create our own ones?
mspaint.exe?
Deprecated!
You're behind at least one news cycle. It's back! (but in the store)