3/5 61 series are using Java. What about other courses e.g. 162 (Java OS?)
164 (COOL Java compiler?), etc etc? Are they now in Java, or still
C/C++? For new students, wouldn't they have to learn both?
-curious 1990 alum
\_ 61a- Scheme, 61b- Java and one week of C++, 61c- C, C++
162 - C++, 164 - depends on prof; hilfy does a Java compiler in C++
while Aiken does a Cool compiler in Java. 169 - choose your own but
most people do their projects in Java. 170 - demmel didn't like
java and told people not to use it. solutions in Standard ML were
provided. our project was written in C. 172 - no programming req'd
but I sometimes hacked together programs to do my HW in scheme
and perl. 174 - none 182 - java and (maybe?) CL 184 - c/c++/Tcl(?)
186- c++ 188- CL and there is a perl decal class this semester.
i haven't taken all these so some of it is hearsay; i started in
1997 -brg
\_ If Berkeley is really serious about hard core computer
science, it would be teaching pseudo academia language that has
absolutely no revelance in the real world (just look at Stanfurd
and MIT). On the other hand, if Berkeley is really serious about
kewl language, it would be teaching Java and nothing else
(just look at community college). IMHO, Berkeley is in between
the useless theoretical academia (Stanfurd) and the ludicrous
industry (community college).
\_ Because Berkeley and MIT are so academically oriented makes
it a very good school for people who want to go out into
the real world. That's why so many good companies that make
leading edge products seek students from universities like
Berkeley. All this theory that you consider so bullshit is
probably more applicable to the real world than anything you
get out of a piece of shit trade school like ITT. I bet you
haven't realized it by now but some of the "bad-ass" chips
sitting in your computer and cell phones wouldn't be there
were it not for masters and PhD students. They don't hire
weenie ass B.S. students like yourself to do something
that important.
\_ Just to name a few:
Kahan (current Berkeley prof) - responsible for IEEE 754
standard and all FP arithmetic on Intels before Pentium
D Patterson (also Cal prof) - RISC, RAID, NOW, IRAM
D Ditzel (Cal masters, auth famous RISC paper w/ Patterson)
responsible for 20 successful chip designs. Now CEO of
Transmeta
Douglas W Clark (prof at Princeton) - lead VAX engineer
that important. Next time you go to a job interview tell
your job interviewer that you think that all professors
from Berkeley are full of shit because they're "theoretical"
and don't use Java and see how far you'll get.
\_ No C++ in 61c, mainly MIPS assembly and a little C
\_ when I was TA'ing last summer, we allowed C++ whenever we
didn't care about their being able to compile-by-hand; C
otherwise. -brg
\_ Sigh... More of the "let's use the kewlest new fad language" from
Cal profs trying to be compu-hip.
\_ clueP? Do you know what you're talking about?
\_ Do you? More code continues to be written in C than JAVA
and this will remain true for years to come.
\_ Good, that's a sensible reason to teach C over Java.
However, this sense is not evident in the initial
comment which presumes idiot profs.
\_ No. Not idiot. Compu-hip kewl profs tagging along
on the latest bandwagon so they won't look like the
dinosaurs they are.
\_ There you go again -- your point is made
\_ And how much code is written in scheme? Why does 61a
use scheme, then? I think it's because it's a good
language to teach concepts of computer science, not
because it's a good language for engineers to use in
a business environment. What do you think?
\_ Yes, true. Fine for a first class. What the hell
is the point of Java other than "We be hip! We be
kewl! We be da with-it Cal Profs!"?
\_ The move to java has let instructors focus less on learning
language specifics and more on theory. There are projects
in 61b that would have never been attempted were it still taught
using c++. That being said, it is true that students tend to
not to pick up c/c++ on their own well enough for upper division
coursework.
\_ In other words, the lower div java crap isn't preparing kids
for what they really need to know to get through the upper
div work? Kewl >> Value in Berkeley CS. Java should be a
9 series course for those interested in fads and nothing
more.
\_ I seriously doubt that the lower division work in any
form ever really prepared students for the amount of
work and "experience" required for upper division work.
The current situation merely stops making pretenses at
trying to say that these courses are "all a CS student
will need" to make it through upper division work, stop
wasting time teaching students something they should
pick up on their own, and use the time to teach them
something they won't pick up on their own. No 61x class
can teach a student the language/programming skills
they need to finish CS1xx work here.
\_ I agree strongly. In addition to providing a strong
theoretical background, I think the most important
thing Berkeley "teaches" is the ability to pick up
new languages and skills. The way this skill is
"taught" is by NOT teaching languages, and expecting
that students learn languages and some other
specifics without being spoonfed them in a class.
I will grant, however, that there are probably more
"in it for the money" lamers today than there were
five or ten years ago. The lamers don't grasp the
value of learning this stuff on their own, and want
to be spoonfed. I think the number of clued folks
has probably stayed pretty much constant over the
years, even though the number of lamers has probably
grown due to the recent tech boom. I think that the
important thing is not to lose sight of the clued
folks even though they're surrounded by a sea of
lamers. I think you'll find that they're every bit
as good as the folks of yesteryear. -dans
\_ There was a time when they knew the difference
between their, they're, and there. Looking good on
the resume, dans.
\_ Corrected oh motd grammar god. I'll take this
as a lesson to be more vigilant about my usage
of homonyms at 3 in the morning. And for the
record: their - used for plural possession
they're - contraction, they are
there - useful little bugger, can
serve (among other things) as
a pronoun and an adverb
-dans
P.S. If that's what they teach in English 1A,
it's no wonder so many Berkeley students are
incapable of composing a coherent sentence.
\_ I was going to say Subject A but I don't
know if it exists anymore.
\_ It still exists and there are still lots
of people who have trouble passing
and/or satisfying it. I AP'ed out.
-dans |
http://csua.com/feed/