[plt-scheme] Re: Programming for non-programmers

On Oct 16, 2004, at 9:33 AM, Alex Peake wrote:

>> Message: 2
>> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:31:00 -0700
>> From: Richard Cleis <rcleis at mac.com>
>> To: "Neil W. Van Dyke" <neil at neilvandyke.org>
>> Subject: Re: [plt-scheme] Re: Programming for non-programmers
>> Cc: plt-scheme at list.cs.brown.edu
>>
>> Is it the 'workers' that need educated or The Industry that needs 
>> educated?  The laments in this
>> thread include errors (made by >'workers', of course) involving 
>> memory allocation, among other
>> low-level issues.  In other words, after a four decade computer 
>> >evolution where operating systems
>> have surpassed a gigabyte, these environments are still so dumb that 
>> it is possible for 'workers'
>> to make the same fundamental errors today as we did when I was a kid.
>>
>> I feel cheated; I was told that programs would be writing themselves 
>> by now! ;)
>
> It is WE the programmers ('workers') that need to write the programs 
> that write programs, surely?

Indeed.  And bus drivers need to be trained to drive a busses.  If 
busses have poorly designed brakes, the drivers (no matter how well 
trained) still crash more than necessary.  Does this mean that we need 
to train them to upgrade brakes?

 From my perspective, CS education is often wasted because graduates 
can't pursue better ideas when so much of their time is wasted merely 
surviving.  This is part of what I meant by 'The Industry Needing 
Training.'  I am applying self criticism here, by the way; I am part of 
The Industry that needs training.

rac


>
> Alex
>