Newsgroups: alt.education.research,k12.chat.junior,k12.chat.senior,k12.chat.teacher,k12.ed.comp.literacy,k12.ed.lang.esp-eng,misc.education.home-school.misc,misc.education,misc.kids,sci.edu,sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!mv!moreira.mv.com!alberto
From: alberto@moreira.mv.com (Alberto C Moreira)
Subject: Re: Two Groovey Teachers
Message-ID: <alberto.126.00148F52@moreira.mv.com>
Nntp-Posting-Host: moreira.mv.com
Sender: usenet@mv.mv.com (System Administrator)
Organization: MV Communications, Inc.
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1995 20:33:27 GMT
References: <3jtnh7$354@s-cwis.unomaha.edu> <Pine.SUN.3.91.950313101948.13635A-100000@altair.herts.ac.uk> <3kg406$f6l@acme.freenet.columbus.oh.us> <3kkmg3$vh@bigboote.WPI.EDU>
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]
Lines: 71
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.edu:8050 sci.lang:37382

In article <3kkmg3$vh@bigboote.WPI.EDU> kestrel@garden.WPI.EDU (Kevin Bruce Pease) writes:
>From: kestrel@garden.WPI.EDU (Kevin Bruce Pease)
>Subject: Re: Two Groovey Teachers
>Date: 20 Mar 1995 19:53:39 GMT

>hshsiao@freenet.columbus.oh.us (Ho-Sheng Hsiao) writes:
>>Info. Sci. Technicians (comtgen@herts.ac.uk) wrote:

[some stuff deleted...]

>> It's just that kids today like to 
>>: take the shortest route possible to get somewhere and if that route is 
>>: slightly longer than expected, then they would give up.

>>Well, programming computers is the shortest route you can get: you have to
>>tell a computer how do something exactly.

>        Which is NOT always the easiest or shortest route.  :)  Take
>an assembler language course (if you haven't), and you'll see what I
>mean.

           Do not mix programming - which is a global skill - with coding, 
           which is language-dependent. Programming is based on two
           pillars: algorithms and data structures. If one knows enough
           about these two, any language will do; some are more verbose
           than others for certain classes of programs, but by and large
           it is possible to migrate from language to language with ease
           as long as the principles are well mastered and the skills are
           adequately honed.
      
  Something that I could do in two seconds with a piece of paper
>and a pen or with a calculator took me about a week to get functioning
>properly on a computer.

            That means you're using the computer far below it's threshold of
            adequacy. One doesn't use assembly to add two numbers but to
            talk to hardware parts other languages cannot reach. 

> We were given a program in assembler
>language that took two positive numbers and added them together, and
>printed the result.  We had to "merely" modify it so that it would
>take negative numbers as input and add them correctly, and we also had
>to allow for a greater range of numbers (It involved changing the
>storage for the numbers from 8 bits to 16 bits, if I recall
>correctly).  It took me a week (2-3 hours a day over 6 days, and then
>7 hours on the 7th day, before I saw that it was good... :) to just
>*modify* the code.  

             This is so typical, it's sad. There's no point learning assembler
             unless two skills are in place: programming skills and machine
             skills. You shouldn't tackle assembler unless you can program
             with a lot of ease in some other language, and you shouldn't
             tackle any assembler without knowing the underlying machine
             architecture.

>Now if that's the easiest and shortest route to do something,
>how come I can add two numbers together on a piece of paper in
>considerably LESS than a week?  :)

              Yes, but you can't maybe multiply two 400x400 matrices in a 
              week, and it takes no more to program it as it takes to program
              the addition of two numbers. Moreover, if I give you two matrices
              and a piece of paper describing the operation I want you to do
              with them - which may not be one of the obvious ones - it'll take
              you even more time. 

              Computers are intended to solve BIG problems in a big way. 

                                                _alberto                       


