Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!udel!rochester!rit!mjl
From: mjl@cs.rit.edu
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Theory vs. Practice in CS Education
Message-ID: <1411@cs.rit.edu>
Date: 20 Nov 89 14:33:59 GMT
References: <4967@ae.sei.cmu.edu> <1989Nov17.090716.11068@cs.eur.nl> <4994@ae.sei.cmu.edu>
Sender: news@cs.rit.edu
Reply-To: mjl@cs.rit.edu (Michael Lutz)
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY
Lines: 53

In article <4994@ae.sei.cmu.edu>:
>In article <1989Nov17.090716.11068@cs.eur.nl> Reino de Boer writes:
>-Didn't someone once say:
>-	each program is in fact an interpreter for a language (where the
>-	language defines all legal input to the program, and the semantics
>-	of the various inputs)
>-If noone ever said it, how about your comments ?
>
>I'm sorry -- If this is directed to me, I am unable to answer you as I do
>not understand the point you are trying to make.
>
>
>Rich

The point is that the study of compilers (or whatever) may give you
insights and models that are useful in the specification and
development of software.  I think you're taking an overly restrictive
view of engineering, as if the form of the inquiry is somehow
independent of the content of the final product.  This is the
engineering equivalent of the generic MBA who can manage anything!

I don't think one can study any branch of engineering in a vacuum,
totally devoid of relevant conceptual models that give substance to the
discipline.  As far as I know, electricial engineering students still take
*engineering* courses in ciruit analysis; undoubtedly they learn
something about the design process as a result, but I'll bet they come
away knowing a thing or three about circuits to boot.

>-- 
>When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers,
>you know something about it.
>Lord Kelvin

Contrapuntally:

There's no sense being exact about something if you don't even know what
you're talking about.
John von Neumann.

Also, Kelvin also used his immense scientific stature to deep-six
most research into the age of the earth (unless the results agreed with
his estimate of at several 10's of millions of years).  I guess that
means he liked some numbers better than others. :-)

Mike Lutz
-- 
Mike Lutz	Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester NY
UUCP:		{rutgers,cornell}!rochester!rit!mjl
INTERNET:	mjlics@ultb.isc.rit.edu

Mike Lutz	Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester NY
UUCP:		{rutgers,cornell}!rochester!rit!mjl
INTERNET:	mjlics@ultb.isc.rit.edu