Path: utzoo!attcan!sobmips!uunet!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!crcraig
From: crcraig@athena.mit.edu (Chris Craig)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Theory vs. Practice in CS Education
Message-ID: <15947@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Date: 16 Nov 89 19:12:16 GMT
References: <880@dms.UUCP> <7044@hubcap.clemson.edu> <4251@pegasus.ATT.COM> <4967@ae.sei.cmu.edu>
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: crcraig@athena.mit.edu (Chris Craig)
Organization: MIT/Project Athena
Lines: 20

In article <4967@ae.sei.cmu.edu> rsd@sei.cmu.edu (Richard S D'Ippolito) writes:

>Nonsense -- this has nothing to do with software engineering, the original
>topic.  At the engineering level, you don't care what the compiler is doing
>with the code anymore than an architect cares how electricity flows through
>wires.

Reasonable in some cases, but kind of naive in others.  Sometimes what
the compiler does with the code determines whether or not your program
satisfies its specifications.

>If you wish to specialize in designing compilers, take the course.

What if I just want to learn about lexical analyzers, parsers, etc. so
I can apply them to *other* areas?  What about a little breadth in
education?  There are lots of reasons to take a compiler design
course, not the least of which is masochism :-)
-----------------------------------------------------------
Chris Craig                                         MIT '89
crcraig@athena.mit.edu                   MIT/Project Athena