Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site sunybcs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!seismo!rochester!rocksvax!sunybcs!531ljr
From: 531ljr@sunybcs.UUCP (john r. loverso)
Newsgroups: net.jokes
Subject: Real Computer Scientists [JOKES] or how i got the cs dept mad at me
Message-ID: <1489@sunybcs.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 15-Apr-84 17:29:39 EST
Article-I.D.: sunybcs.1489
Posted: Sun Apr 15 17:29:39 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 17-Apr-84 08:09:03 EST
Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science
Lines: 67

This is the third [and last] page:
(unless some genius comes up with "Real Hackers Don't Crash the O/S")
---------------

               "Real Computer Scientists Don't Write Code"

Real computer scientists don't write code.  They occasionally tinker with
"programming systems," but those are so high level that they hardly count
and rarely count accurately.  (Precision is for applications.)

Real computer scientists don't comment their code.  The identifiers are
so long they can't afford the disk space.

Real computer scientists don't write the user interfaces; they merely argue
over what they should look like.

Real computer scientists don't eat quiche.  They shun Szechwan food since
the hackers discovered it.  Many real computer scientists consider eating
an implementation detail.  (Others break down and eat with hackers, but only
if they can have ice cream for dessert.)

If it doesn't have a programming environment complete with an interactive
debugger, structure editor, and extensive cross-module type checking, real
computer scientists won't be seen tinkering with it.  They may have to use it
to balance their checkbooks, as their own systems cant.

Real computer scientists don't program in assembler.  They don't write in
anything less portable than a Number Two pencil.

Real computer scientists don't debug programs; they dynamically modify them.
This is safer, since no one has invented a way to do anything dynamic in
FORTRAN, COBOL, or BASIC.

Real computer scientists like C's structured constructs, but they are
suspicious of it because it is compiled.  (Only batch freaks and
efficiency weirdos bother with compilers; they're soooo un-dynamic.)

Real computer scientists play Go.  They have nothing against the concept
of mountain climbing, but the actual climbing is an implementation detail
best left to programmers.

Real computer scientists admire ADA for its overwhelming aesthetic value,
but they find it difficult to actually program in, as it is much too large
to implement.  Most computer scientists don't notice this because they are
still arguing over what else to add to ADA.

Real computer scientists work from 5 pm to 9 am because that's the only time
they can get the 8 megabytes of main memory they need to edit specs.
(Real works starts around 2 am when enough MIPS are free for their dynamic
systems.)  Real computer scientists find it hard to share 3081s when they
are doing "real" work.

Real computer scientists only write specs for languages that might run on
future hardware.  Nobody trusts them to write specs for anything homo
sapiens will ever be able to fit on a single plant.
-------------
(once again, thanx to Roger Hain at Princeton for sending me this
 to begin with (via USnail)...  may he never get lost in space)
John Robert LoVerso @ SUNY Buffalo
UUCP: {harpo,hao,pur-ee,uwvax}!seismo!rochester!rocksvax!sunybcs!531ljr
      watmath!sunybcs!531ljr
CSnet: 531ljr@buffalo
ARPA: 531ljr.buffalo-cs@{csnet-relay,rand-relay}
USnail:  103 Shirley Ave
         Buffalo, NY  14215
--
Repeal the Income Tax / Support the Liberty Admendment!