🚀 go-pugleaf

This discussion has been going on long enough so that it's getting tough to
say who is saying what.  Therefore, I'll preface each person's comments with
their name instead of a cryptic series of punctuation characters.

nevin1> refers to nevin1@ihlpf.UUCP (00704a-Liber,N.J.)
wcs>    refers to wcs@ho95e.UUCP (46323-Bill.Stewart,2G218,x0705,) writes)
pcm>    refers to me (Phil Miller, pcm@iwarpo.UUCP).

wcs>.	Remember that 1st-year students, even CS students, are studying
wcs>.	more than just CS100, and, if possible, they should have *some*
wcs>.	usable programming knowledge as soon as possible.  While it's
wcs>.	probably a Bad Thing to expose them to BASIC, whatever
wcs>.	functional language you teach them had better be adequate for
wcs>.	doing chemistry and physics homework, numerical integration for
wcs>.	calculus, statistics for their psych classes, and the like.

Good point, Bill.  This is generally the point I was trying to make.

nevin1> 1st year students usually do not need anything more than a 
nevin1> calculator for intro courses in chem, physics, calc, psych, etc.

I think you are dating yourself.  First year science courses were
starting to make serious use of computers 15 years ago when I was a
college freshman.  As computing resources become more widely used in
universities, students will need to know more and more about
programming.

Incidentally, I don't happen to feel that's a good thing.  It would be
nice if a physicist (for example) could stick primarily to physics and
not have to learn a second discipline (computer science).  Hopefully,
the legacy of our generation of programmers will be a considerable
simplification in computer user interfaces.

wcs.> And somewhere along the lines, engineering students will *have* to
wcs.> learn Fortran, if only so they can do interesting *engineering*
wcs.> research without having to rewrite EISPAK and its hench-programs.

nevin1>   And engineers DO NOT have to learn FORTRAN!!

On which planet?  Your statement is rhetorical and doesn't have practical
value.  I think you would be hard pressed to find an engineering curriculum
which didn't require FORTRAN (with the possible exception of Computer Science,
which you may or may not count as engineering).

pcm> [ ... ]  I have just changed jobs.  In no interview was I asked
pcm> whether I knew ML; in every interview I was asked if I knew C.

I've been generally amused at the response I've gotten to this statement.
As a footnote, I'll add that I used to list ML on my resume as one of the 
programming languages I know.  I finally removed it because (1) nobody
had ever heard of it, and (2) when I explained what it was, they didn't
care.

wcs>.	but to interview at larger companies you may need the buzzword list
wcs>.	there so the personnel people will pass it on to the people you
wcs>.	really care about.)

...and smaller companies can't afford to train you how to program in C,
so you probably won't get a job there unless you know C.

nevin1> Interviewers want to know what you can do, and not so much what you
nevin1> have already done.

HUH??????????????  Now I'm convinced you're from another planet.  Companies
usually want someone to work on a specific project.  Someone with a track
record in a related area to that project will be considerably more valuable
than someone who only knows, say, functional programming languages.

nevin1> Learn the good programming habits first; then pick up all the 'fad'
nevin1> languages.  It will pay off a lot better in the end.

Now let me get this straight.  Fortran, which has been around since about
1950, and C, which is the implementation language for the defacto industry
standard operating system and about a jillion utilities and applications 
programs, these are the fad languages, right?

Incidentally, the implication here is that you can't learn 'good programming
habits' in C.  Bullshit.

Lucky for me, though, I know ML and Prolog, so if I ever have to your
planet, I'll be able to get a job ;-).

Phil Miller