Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!ingres.berkeley.edu!ait
From: ait@ingres.berkeley.edu.ARPA (Allen Tuan)
Newsgroups: net.cse
Subject: Re: Math and CS
Message-ID: <214@ingres.berkeley.edu.ARPA>
Date: Sun, 16-Mar-86 18:00:28 EST
Article-I.D.: ingres.214
Posted: Sun Mar 16 18:00:28 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 18-Mar-86 01:39:31 EST
References: <256@hropus.UUCP> <6400005@ccvaxa> <77@umcp-cs.UUCP> <9430@ritcv.UUCP> <5826@kestrel.ARPA>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: ait@ingres.berkeley.edu.UUCP (Allen Tuan)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 59

In article <5826@kestrel.ARPA> ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin) writes:
>In article <9430@ritcv.UUCP>, jxs7451@ritcv.UUCP writes:
>> The funny thing about CS student having problems with math is that most math
>> students have big problems with comp sci courses.  

>Hardly. Only the ones that aren't interested. 

Beaver: Gee Wally, I guess you could say that most computer science 
	students don't do well at math because they aren't interested
	in math, huh?
Wally:  Hardly. Gee Beaver, don't you know anything?  Math students are
	God's gift to the Earth, and if they are not good at anything,
	it is only due to lack of interest, and not, God forbid, due
	to lack of ability.  Most computer science students, on the 
	other hand, are scuzzes of the Earth because they aren't good
	at math (which as we all know, is infinitely more interesting 
	than, say, programming).

>I don't recall any
>math students having problems with analysis of algorithms, 
>compiler design, theory of computation, logic or graph theory.
>And most don't have problems with the concurrency puzzles that
>constitute a significant fragment of operating systems courses.
>Where did you get this idea from?
>
>Peter Ladkin

Gee Pete, has it ever occurred to you that perhaps math students 
who have ventured into the realms of analysis of algorithms,
compiler design, theory of computation, graph theory, operating
systems, etc etc etc are precisely those who are *interested* in
and have a *talent* for computer science.  I too, if my memory
happened to be as conveniently crippled as yours, can recall only computer
science students who have interest and talent in math, and have had
no problems in upper division math courses offered here at Berkeley.

Enough sarcasm for now (sarcasm is one of my reactions to condescension
on the part of alleged know-it-alls (yes, yes, I know, no more name calling)).
My point is, sure, there are math students who do well in compiler 
construction and operating systems courses, just as there are computer
science students who do well in abstract algebra, number theory, and
the likes.  But to conclude from that that (that that???) ALL math
students are good at compiler construction or concurrent programming
seems a bit foolhardy.  After all, if a math student didn't do well in
introduction computer science courses (if they *elected* to take those
courses in the first place), he/she isn't likely to venture far into 
the computer science curriculum.  Computer science students, on the
other hand, are *required* to take some math courses, and since 
the love of math isn't what led them to computer science in the
first place (at leat not in my case), it would seem reasonable that 
some (or perhaps a lot, depending on the school, I'd guess) computer 
science students would flounder in math.

There, I finally got my two bits in.

Allen

[no .signature - flames to ait@ingres.berkeley.edu]
on the other hand, are *required* to