Message from Jab in /r/SargonOfAkkad (Sparta) #comp-sci
Your picture is surprisingly accurate
F u c k
RIP in peace
Worked the first try
I'm giving OOP benefits to definitions defined in YAML config files.
the package level handles sorting out definitions being resolved without much interfacing from the definition implementation.
auto-sorting of inheritance \o/
**WAKE ME UP**
I actually enjoy these exercises 😄
I would rather do this than grunt work
I wrote my own approach to Annotated event handlers & command handlers to bukkit for Minecraft
They use reflection which is much slower than Java's version of pointers
Yes, Java technically has pointers
the best feeling in the world is writing a shitload of code and it works perfectly
I’d believe you @Deleted User , but I’ve never seen any evidence of this miracle.
CS courses shouldn't teach languages. Maybe start with one or two languages, to get things going. Then it's the student's job to put some effort into it, and learn what needs to be learned.
At my university, it starts off with Scheme (for a SICP-style course) and C/Pascal (for an introduction to programming course); although you can choose other functional and imperative languages if you want, you just won't get help from the TAs if it's not one of these.
After that, there's no more requirements for language, you pick whatever fits your needs.
I've seen universities that will literally list a bunch of programming languages as the courses. "Programming in C++", "Programming in Java", "Programming in Ruby", "Programming in PHP"...
The only place where addressing specific languages make sense is in a "Programming Language Design" course. Then of course you use various design approaches from different existing languages.
yes, or a university located around some exceptionally large companies that hire 70%+ of their students, then I'd say it's fine to focus on using the languages those companies use internally during the courses
But then you're not creating computer scientists, only programmers.
There should be nothing wrong with just being trained in specific technologies. It probably makes more sense, financially.
from the multiple graduates I've talked to from the two local universities, they're neither programmers nor scientists though
Cheaper, you get a piece of paper that claims you have been trained in the technology, you're done with it sooner...
Only downside might be you starting salary.
apparently up to 50% of their curriculum is project management and time management
and related fluff
that is to say, non-technical
Oh boy, I noticed how common "Software Engineering = Project Management" is on universities.