Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!qantel!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020
From: mc68020@gilbbs.UUCP (Thomas J Keller)
Newsgroups: net.cse
Subject: Re: Topics for a Computer Science degree
Message-ID: <905@gilbbs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 12-Sep-86 01:00:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: gilbbs.905
Posted: Fri Sep 12 01:00:44 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Sep-86 05:59:21 EDT
References: <13500008@uiucdcsb> <65@alberta.UUCP> <1642@mcc-pp.UUCP>
Organization: Gil's Place, Santa Rosa CA
Lines: 53
Summary: more CS/CE/programming horsepuckey


Once again, we are involved in this silly argument.  A am going to make a few
points in this article, and I am **NOT** planning to pull any punches.  If
you can't take strong statements, quit now.  Comments on my statements are
welcome, flames can be sent to /dev/null (or up your A**E).

1)  There *IS* a difference between Computer Science and Computer Engineering.
    They are separate, but **HIGHLY** congruent fields.  In particular, the
    CS major should have a general understanding of CS topics, with a reasonable
    comprehension of gate-level logic and hardware interfacing considerations.
    CE majors, on the otherhand, need a much more thourough comprehension of
    CS topics.  It is impossible to adequately engineer a machine (for *ANY*
    purpose, if one does not comprehend the purpose and use of the machine to
    be designed.  To argue otherwise is to argue in favor of the increasing
    levels of mediocrity one sees in virtually all fields of endeavor.  It
    is not valid to claim that in as much as a field has grown so large that 
    no one can know everything there is to know of it, that one therefore 
    should learn *ONLY* those small portions necessary to accomplish a given
    task.

2)  People whose goal is to become *programmers* should go to the Control 
    Data Institute, or some such equivalent trade school, where they will
    be taught a programming language or two, *MAYBE* a little math, and
    hopefully a little about data structures.  This will meet their needs.
    **********  S T O P  ********** hampering the Computer Science schools
    with these people!  Due to limited resources, the universities cannot
    provide separate curricula (most can't anyway), and so the *SERIOUS*
    CS students get watered down corses, while the FPA (Future Programmers 
    of America) get courses too complex or advanced for their needs (and 
    usually for their capabilities as well).  Lay off the "elitism" crap,
    too!  Computer Science curricula are, or should be designed to prepare
    COMPUTER SCIENTISTS for their chosen profession.  If other people wish
    to be programmers, more power to them!  The world *NEEDS* more programmers.
    By all means, let us train them well.  But ***DON'T*** screw the CS
    students in the process!

3)  Probably the single most important are of computer sciences right now is
    in research.  We desparately need qualified COmputer Scientists (as opposed
    to mere programmers) to conduct the research which is going to move us 
    into the next few generations of computing.  If we don't stop confusing
    CS curricula with FPA curricula, we are going to fall behind the Japanese
    and a few others once again.  **GROW** up, damn it!

    Now that I've said my piece, leave me be.

-- 

Disclaimer:  Disclaimer?  DISCLAIMER!? I don't need no stinking DISCLAIMER!!!

tom keller					"She's alive, ALIVE!"
{ihnp4, dual}!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020

(* we may not be big, but we're small! *)