<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_12_1744220</id>
	<title>Which Language Approach For a Computer Science Degree?</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1247425020000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>wikid\_one writes <i>"I recently went back to college to finish my CS degree, however this time I moved to a new school.  My previous school taught only C++, except for a few higher level electives (OpenGL).  The school I am now attending teaches what seems like every language in the book.  The first two semesters are Java, and then you move to Python, C, Bash, Oracle, and Assembly.  While I feel that it would be nice to get a well-rounded introduction to the programming world, I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job.  After reading the syllabi, all the higher level classes appear to teach concepts rather than work to develop advanced techniques in a specific language.  Which method of teaching is going to better provide me with the experience I need, as well as the experience an employer wants to see in a college graduate?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>wikid \ _one writes " I recently went back to college to finish my CS degree , however this time I moved to a new school .
My previous school taught only C + + , except for a few higher level electives ( OpenGL ) .
The school I am now attending teaches what seems like every language in the book .
The first two semesters are Java , and then you move to Python , C , Bash , Oracle , and Assembly .
While I feel that it would be nice to get a well-rounded introduction to the programming world , I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job .
After reading the syllabi , all the higher level classes appear to teach concepts rather than work to develop advanced techniques in a specific language .
Which method of teaching is going to better provide me with the experience I need , as well as the experience an employer wants to see in a college graduate ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wikid\_one writes "I recently went back to college to finish my CS degree, however this time I moved to a new school.
My previous school taught only C++, except for a few higher level electives (OpenGL).
The school I am now attending teaches what seems like every language in the book.
The first two semesters are Java, and then you move to Python, C, Bash, Oracle, and Assembly.
While I feel that it would be nice to get a well-rounded introduction to the programming world, I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job.
After reading the syllabi, all the higher level classes appear to teach concepts rather than work to develop advanced techniques in a specific language.
Which method of teaching is going to better provide me with the experience I need, as well as the experience an employer wants to see in a college graduate?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669657</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe you're the wrong place</title>
	<author>rolfwind</author>
	<datestamp>1247392320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Despite what many believe, a CS degree is not about learning to program. A CS degree is about learning the theoretical and mathematical constructs that programming is based on.</p></div></blockquote><p>Learning to program is a great way to apply the theoretical.</p><p>As for all the people saying that the language isn't important, I have a different approach: learn a functional language like a lisp variant (common, scheme, etc) or haskell, etcetera.  They are different enough from the C derived languages to let you think outside the box later on (after all, if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail....)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Despite what many believe , a CS degree is not about learning to program .
A CS degree is about learning the theoretical and mathematical constructs that programming is based on.Learning to program is a great way to apply the theoretical.As for all the people saying that the language is n't important , I have a different approach : learn a functional language like a lisp variant ( common , scheme , etc ) or haskell , etcetera .
They are different enough from the C derived languages to let you think outside the box later on ( after all , if all you have is a hammer , everything looks like a nail.... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Despite what many believe, a CS degree is not about learning to program.
A CS degree is about learning the theoretical and mathematical constructs that programming is based on.Learning to program is a great way to apply the theoretical.As for all the people saying that the language isn't important, I have a different approach: learn a functional language like a lisp variant (common, scheme, etc) or haskell, etcetera.
They are different enough from the C derived languages to let you think outside the box later on (after all, if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail....)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671601</id>
	<title>Re:C# and Bing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247409240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Heh.  I saw a recent job posting for a Solaris and Linux admin.  On the Linux side, they wanted someone with 10+ years of "Red Hat Linux 64-bit OS".</p><p>I had fun with a couple of recruiters over that one.  Funny thing, I was doing some work with 64-bit Linux 10-11 years ago--UltraPenguin on Sun UltraSPARC systems--which of course was RedHat-based, but not supported by them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Heh .
I saw a recent job posting for a Solaris and Linux admin .
On the Linux side , they wanted someone with 10 + years of " Red Hat Linux 64-bit OS " .I had fun with a couple of recruiters over that one .
Funny thing , I was doing some work with 64-bit Linux 10-11 years ago--UltraPenguin on Sun UltraSPARC systems--which of course was RedHat-based , but not supported by them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Heh.
I saw a recent job posting for a Solaris and Linux admin.
On the Linux side, they wanted someone with 10+ years of "Red Hat Linux 64-bit OS".I had fun with a couple of recruiters over that one.
Funny thing, I was doing some work with 64-bit Linux 10-11 years ago--UltraPenguin on Sun UltraSPARC systems--which of course was RedHat-based, but not supported by them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669269</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671789</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247411160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Being in expert in one programming language is fine if you just want to be a programmer. If you want to be a computer scientist, it's neither necessary nor sufficient.</p></div></blockquote><p>But in reality most of us actually want to be software engineers. So where does that leave your statement?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Being in expert in one programming language is fine if you just want to be a programmer .
If you want to be a computer scientist , it 's neither necessary nor sufficient.But in reality most of us actually want to be software engineers .
So where does that leave your statement ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being in expert in one programming language is fine if you just want to be a programmer.
If you want to be a computer scientist, it's neither necessary nor sufficient.But in reality most of us actually want to be software engineers.
So where does that leave your statement?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28686261</id>
	<title>Master algorithms + an oo language + practice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247503800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a CS graduate you are expected to be a good to great programmer and an expert in a few of the common languages. You are expected to understand most of the algorithms (including runtime and space complexity) in Cormen et al Intro to Algorithms. You must understand and recall many of the common design patterns and be able to implement them in a common OO language.</p><p>If I was you I would choose to become a serious expert in C++ or Java, and learn a couple of scripting languages (python,perl,ruby) and at least one SQL based db product.  To get past interviews in C++, you should be able to answer most questions in the C++ FAQ by Cline.</p><p>Another real world skill that is not always taught is working with large frameworks.  Find an open source project in your OO language of choice and become a contributor. In a company, you will be working with an existing code base that's hundreds of thousands of lines of code. Your classwork of writing 2000 line class projects from scratch is very different from the reality.</p><p>Be an expert in something.  Keep learning new algorithms, new languages. Stay on the bleeding edge.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a CS graduate you are expected to be a good to great programmer and an expert in a few of the common languages .
You are expected to understand most of the algorithms ( including runtime and space complexity ) in Cormen et al Intro to Algorithms .
You must understand and recall many of the common design patterns and be able to implement them in a common OO language.If I was you I would choose to become a serious expert in C + + or Java , and learn a couple of scripting languages ( python,perl,ruby ) and at least one SQL based db product .
To get past interviews in C + + , you should be able to answer most questions in the C + + FAQ by Cline.Another real world skill that is not always taught is working with large frameworks .
Find an open source project in your OO language of choice and become a contributor .
In a company , you will be working with an existing code base that 's hundreds of thousands of lines of code .
Your classwork of writing 2000 line class projects from scratch is very different from the reality.Be an expert in something .
Keep learning new algorithms , new languages .
Stay on the bleeding edge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a CS graduate you are expected to be a good to great programmer and an expert in a few of the common languages.
You are expected to understand most of the algorithms (including runtime and space complexity) in Cormen et al Intro to Algorithms.
You must understand and recall many of the common design patterns and be able to implement them in a common OO language.If I was you I would choose to become a serious expert in C++ or Java, and learn a couple of scripting languages (python,perl,ruby) and at least one SQL based db product.
To get past interviews in C++, you should be able to answer most questions in the C++ FAQ by Cline.Another real world skill that is not always taught is working with large frameworks.
Find an open source project in your OO language of choice and become a contributor.
In a company, you will be working with an existing code base that's hundreds of thousands of lines of code.
Your classwork of writing 2000 line class projects from scratch is very different from the reality.Be an expert in something.
Keep learning new algorithms, new languages.
Stay on the bleeding edge.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669069</id>
	<title>Re:Go to a "trade school" for that. Not a universi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247430300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's like saying an Art MFA shouldn't teach any actual art in any particular medium, just hypothetical art.</p><p>There IS a distinction between the "craft" of programming in any particular language and software engineering, but in order to become a software engineer, you need to work through the medium of the language. That's the only way to access it. Knowing how to paint in oils doesn't make you a good artist, but you do have to start making art in some manner in order to get there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's like saying an Art MFA should n't teach any actual art in any particular medium , just hypothetical art.There IS a distinction between the " craft " of programming in any particular language and software engineering , but in order to become a software engineer , you need to work through the medium of the language .
That 's the only way to access it .
Knowing how to paint in oils does n't make you a good artist , but you do have to start making art in some manner in order to get there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's like saying an Art MFA shouldn't teach any actual art in any particular medium, just hypothetical art.There IS a distinction between the "craft" of programming in any particular language and software engineering, but in order to become a software engineer, you need to work through the medium of the language.
That's the only way to access it.
Knowing how to paint in oils doesn't make you a good artist, but you do have to start making art in some manner in order to get there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670455</id>
	<title>Computer \_science\_ - what's in the name</title>
	<author>apresrasage</author>
	<datestamp>1247398680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since the degree is in computer science<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... you should feel blessed you get to program at all<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)
As a scientist, you do need to understand the concepts and many a computer scientists ends
up doing more math (algorithms and such), devising new ways for machines and humans
to interact  and many other beautiful things<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... not coding. Programming by itself is not a
science (although many aspects of it can be subjects of scientific research).

Although 'trade schools' may not be the best way to go, some colleges nowadays offer various
programming oriented degrees (such as web developer). A good program of this sort will teach
you how to program as well as the concepts that go along with it.

On the other end of the spectrum: problem solving, computing related concepts etc. in combination
with solid basic programming skills will have you program enough in any language to be dangerous
without putting all your eggs in the same basket (... 'I program well in Visual Basic' does not go
over well during interviews<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... 'I have strong programming skills' feeds the kids).

Languages come and go (as they should<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... call it progress). Good programming skills stay.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since the degree is in computer science ... you should feel blessed you get to program at all ; - ) As a scientist , you do need to understand the concepts and many a computer scientists ends up doing more math ( algorithms and such ) , devising new ways for machines and humans to interact and many other beautiful things .... not coding .
Programming by itself is not a science ( although many aspects of it can be subjects of scientific research ) .
Although 'trade schools ' may not be the best way to go , some colleges nowadays offer various programming oriented degrees ( such as web developer ) .
A good program of this sort will teach you how to program as well as the concepts that go along with it .
On the other end of the spectrum : problem solving , computing related concepts etc .
in combination with solid basic programming skills will have you program enough in any language to be dangerous without putting all your eggs in the same basket ( ... 'I program well in Visual Basic ' does not go over well during interviews ... 'I have strong programming skills ' feeds the kids ) .
Languages come and go ( as they should ... call it progress ) .
Good programming skills stay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since the degree is in computer science ... you should feel blessed you get to program at all ;-)
As a scientist, you do need to understand the concepts and many a computer scientists ends
up doing more math (algorithms and such), devising new ways for machines and humans
to interact  and many other beautiful things .... not coding.
Programming by itself is not a
science (although many aspects of it can be subjects of scientific research).
Although 'trade schools' may not be the best way to go, some colleges nowadays offer various
programming oriented degrees (such as web developer).
A good program of this sort will teach
you how to program as well as the concepts that go along with it.
On the other end of the spectrum: problem solving, computing related concepts etc.
in combination
with solid basic programming skills will have you program enough in any language to be dangerous
without putting all your eggs in the same basket (... 'I program well in Visual Basic' does not go
over well during interviews ... 'I have strong programming skills' feeds the kids).
Languages come and go (as they should ... call it progress).
Good programming skills stay.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669653</id>
	<title>Re:Find another major</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247392260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think this is accurate. Make sure you're top of your class (just like any other major) and offers pour in. If you are average or below average its going to be more difficult.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think this is accurate .
Make sure you 're top of your class ( just like any other major ) and offers pour in .
If you are average or below average its going to be more difficult .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think this is accurate.
Make sure you're top of your class (just like any other major) and offers pour in.
If you are average or below average its going to be more difficult.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677471</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>farmanb</author>
	<datestamp>1247503980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you might both be a little bit extreme, on both ends of the spectrum.  While the specific language that's used isn't what's important, it is (unless you're going to be a theoretical computer scientist--i.e. a mathematics professor) very much necessary to understand actual programming languages and to be productive if you wish to work somewhere as a programmer.  The big point that should be made is that which language you use is not important.  A good Computer Scientist should never be bound by languages, as the languages are nothing more than methods by which you express your ideas.  The real point of a good CS education is to teach the student how to think like a computer scientist, not to teach them how to use a language.  If you have a truly good background, you should almost always think the problem through logically and be able to come up with a solution independent of the language you're going to use.  Once you know the solution, the rest is just implementation, the details of which can easily be picked up from a little language documentation.  At that point, having a broad knowledge of languages (and their internals) can prove very useful as it may very well give you insight into which language is best suited to implementing your solution.
<br>
<br>

To the OP, my suggestion is to not worry so much about whether or not you're going to be an expert in one specific language.  Languages aren't hard to pick up and the kinds of jobs you would be looking at which are aimed at code monkeys are much less interesting, usually dead end jobs, and most likely not places you want to end up.  If your school doesn't require it, I'd heavily suggest finding and taking a programming languages course.  They usually cover the big paradigms: OOP, Functional, Logical, Imperative, etc., some of the real world applications of grammars (i.e. parsers), possibly some compiler material  and the various internals of a programming language (types, scope, etc.).  These generalities won't change from language to language, but the specific implementations will.  If they can teach you to think in the bigger generalities, the specifics will come easily and the extra language training won't seem anywhere near as important.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you might both be a little bit extreme , on both ends of the spectrum .
While the specific language that 's used is n't what 's important , it is ( unless you 're going to be a theoretical computer scientist--i.e .
a mathematics professor ) very much necessary to understand actual programming languages and to be productive if you wish to work somewhere as a programmer .
The big point that should be made is that which language you use is not important .
A good Computer Scientist should never be bound by languages , as the languages are nothing more than methods by which you express your ideas .
The real point of a good CS education is to teach the student how to think like a computer scientist , not to teach them how to use a language .
If you have a truly good background , you should almost always think the problem through logically and be able to come up with a solution independent of the language you 're going to use .
Once you know the solution , the rest is just implementation , the details of which can easily be picked up from a little language documentation .
At that point , having a broad knowledge of languages ( and their internals ) can prove very useful as it may very well give you insight into which language is best suited to implementing your solution .
To the OP , my suggestion is to not worry so much about whether or not you 're going to be an expert in one specific language .
Languages are n't hard to pick up and the kinds of jobs you would be looking at which are aimed at code monkeys are much less interesting , usually dead end jobs , and most likely not places you want to end up .
If your school does n't require it , I 'd heavily suggest finding and taking a programming languages course .
They usually cover the big paradigms : OOP , Functional , Logical , Imperative , etc. , some of the real world applications of grammars ( i.e .
parsers ) , possibly some compiler material and the various internals of a programming language ( types , scope , etc. ) .
These generalities wo n't change from language to language , but the specific implementations will .
If they can teach you to think in the bigger generalities , the specifics will come easily and the extra language training wo n't seem anywhere near as important .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you might both be a little bit extreme, on both ends of the spectrum.
While the specific language that's used isn't what's important, it is (unless you're going to be a theoretical computer scientist--i.e.
a mathematics professor) very much necessary to understand actual programming languages and to be productive if you wish to work somewhere as a programmer.
The big point that should be made is that which language you use is not important.
A good Computer Scientist should never be bound by languages, as the languages are nothing more than methods by which you express your ideas.
The real point of a good CS education is to teach the student how to think like a computer scientist, not to teach them how to use a language.
If you have a truly good background, you should almost always think the problem through logically and be able to come up with a solution independent of the language you're going to use.
Once you know the solution, the rest is just implementation, the details of which can easily be picked up from a little language documentation.
At that point, having a broad knowledge of languages (and their internals) can prove very useful as it may very well give you insight into which language is best suited to implementing your solution.
To the OP, my suggestion is to not worry so much about whether or not you're going to be an expert in one specific language.
Languages aren't hard to pick up and the kinds of jobs you would be looking at which are aimed at code monkeys are much less interesting, usually dead end jobs, and most likely not places you want to end up.
If your school doesn't require it, I'd heavily suggest finding and taking a programming languages course.
They usually cover the big paradigms: OOP, Functional, Logical, Imperative, etc., some of the real world applications of grammars (i.e.
parsers), possibly some compiler material  and the various internals of a programming language (types, scope, etc.).
These generalities won't change from language to language, but the specific implementations will.
If they can teach you to think in the bigger generalities, the specifics will come easily and the extra language training won't seem anywhere near as important.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671133</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670839</id>
	<title>D is what you need</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247402400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No one programs in D because no one CAN program in D, but that doesn't mean it's not a great language. Get Computer Science out of the dark ages and ignore the ancient relics that decry it because they can't be bothered to learn a new language. I'm just a hobby programmer, but I want computer programming to evolve to the point where 50 years from now we have a language that is mapped to peoples brain patterns so we can program things easily with the power of thought.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No one programs in D because no one CAN program in D , but that does n't mean it 's not a great language .
Get Computer Science out of the dark ages and ignore the ancient relics that decry it because they ca n't be bothered to learn a new language .
I 'm just a hobby programmer , but I want computer programming to evolve to the point where 50 years from now we have a language that is mapped to peoples brain patterns so we can program things easily with the power of thought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one programs in D because no one CAN program in D, but that doesn't mean it's not a great language.
Get Computer Science out of the dark ages and ignore the ancient relics that decry it because they can't be bothered to learn a new language.
I'm just a hobby programmer, but I want computer programming to evolve to the point where 50 years from now we have a language that is mapped to peoples brain patterns so we can program things easily with the power of thought.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676503</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1247500740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> But more to the point, Knuth is an expert in programming</p></div><p>
Considering the fact that TeX is a programming language which doesn't support structured programming, I'd dispute this.  TeX may be bug free (it isn't; bugs have been found in it and people have received cheques for them, although few people cash them), but TeX is tiny.  It is a simple VM for a trivial architecture.  Most of the useful code is in macro packages written on top of TeX.  These are frequently buggy, because TeX is horrible to program in.</p><p>
Most people who quote Djikstra seem not to understand astronomy either.  A competent astronomer knows a huge amount about optics and most have built a simple reflector (at least) and often several telescopes.  They often work on the design of modern telescopes.  But they shouldn't forget that their true field of study is the stars.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But more to the point , Knuth is an expert in programming Considering the fact that TeX is a programming language which does n't support structured programming , I 'd dispute this .
TeX may be bug free ( it is n't ; bugs have been found in it and people have received cheques for them , although few people cash them ) , but TeX is tiny .
It is a simple VM for a trivial architecture .
Most of the useful code is in macro packages written on top of TeX .
These are frequently buggy , because TeX is horrible to program in .
Most people who quote Djikstra seem not to understand astronomy either .
A competent astronomer knows a huge amount about optics and most have built a simple reflector ( at least ) and often several telescopes .
They often work on the design of modern telescopes .
But they should n't forget that their true field of study is the stars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> But more to the point, Knuth is an expert in programming
Considering the fact that TeX is a programming language which doesn't support structured programming, I'd dispute this.
TeX may be bug free (it isn't; bugs have been found in it and people have received cheques for them, although few people cash them), but TeX is tiny.
It is a simple VM for a trivial architecture.
Most of the useful code is in macro packages written on top of TeX.
These are frequently buggy, because TeX is horrible to program in.
Most people who quote Djikstra seem not to understand astronomy either.
A competent astronomer knows a huge amount about optics and most have built a simple reflector (at least) and often several telescopes.
They often work on the design of modern telescopes.
But they shouldn't forget that their true field of study is the stars.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671133</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675815</id>
	<title>Re:C# and Bing</title>
	<author>BlueKitties</author>
	<datestamp>1247498040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Looks like this is a subspace process that forked after Balmer's time squad succeeded in stopping the GNU &amp; Linux projects from ever being founded.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks like this is a subspace process that forked after Balmer 's time squad succeeded in stopping the GNU &amp; Linux projects from ever being founded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks like this is a subspace process that forked after Balmer's time squad succeeded in stopping the GNU &amp; Linux projects from ever being founded.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671841</id>
	<title>Learn the Ropes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247411700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't even worry so much about the language - lean the science of computing.</p><p>I can't tell you how fustrating it is to work with new and old coders that have no idea how to write solid secure code that will work outside their dev machine.  It is my personal oppinion that C# and Java have done more harm to computer science than good.  College graduates are ready to work in a sweat shop churning out lines of code without having any idea as to why things function.  They are not adaptable.</p><p>In order to be truly usefull you need to build a solid understanding of how computers function, how they use memory, how their I/O systems work, and how they communicate.</p><p>The best way to learn all of these systems is to actually use the computers.  Learn memory management and master difficult concepts.  Knowing Java and C# is great - untill one of your servers starts to crash and everyone is pointing fingers.  Knowing the deep internals will allow you to work as a great asset by debugging the server and fixing the problem - even when that problem is not your code.</p><p>You real job as a developer is to do just that develop solutions.</p><p>The most important facet of development is communication.</p><p>Languages are going to continualy evolve.  Be good at learning, communicating, and developing solutions.  You will often find that every project will require you to either learn new langauages or refine existing skills.</p><p>Rejoice in your new school.  Sieze every oppurtunity to learn the why behind all of the languages.  Jump on every oppurtunity to branch out (I.E. take electives in hardware design).</p><p>Most of all - enjoy the jorney!  I consider Computer Science to be the best job in the world.  There are many days that I wake up in amazement that I am actually paid to do what I love!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't even worry so much about the language - lean the science of computing.I ca n't tell you how fustrating it is to work with new and old coders that have no idea how to write solid secure code that will work outside their dev machine .
It is my personal oppinion that C # and Java have done more harm to computer science than good .
College graduates are ready to work in a sweat shop churning out lines of code without having any idea as to why things function .
They are not adaptable.In order to be truly usefull you need to build a solid understanding of how computers function , how they use memory , how their I/O systems work , and how they communicate.The best way to learn all of these systems is to actually use the computers .
Learn memory management and master difficult concepts .
Knowing Java and C # is great - untill one of your servers starts to crash and everyone is pointing fingers .
Knowing the deep internals will allow you to work as a great asset by debugging the server and fixing the problem - even when that problem is not your code.You real job as a developer is to do just that develop solutions.The most important facet of development is communication.Languages are going to continualy evolve .
Be good at learning , communicating , and developing solutions .
You will often find that every project will require you to either learn new langauages or refine existing skills.Rejoice in your new school .
Sieze every oppurtunity to learn the why behind all of the languages .
Jump on every oppurtunity to branch out ( I.E .
take electives in hardware design ) .Most of all - enjoy the jorney !
I consider Computer Science to be the best job in the world .
There are many days that I wake up in amazement that I am actually paid to do what I love !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't even worry so much about the language - lean the science of computing.I can't tell you how fustrating it is to work with new and old coders that have no idea how to write solid secure code that will work outside their dev machine.
It is my personal oppinion that C# and Java have done more harm to computer science than good.
College graduates are ready to work in a sweat shop churning out lines of code without having any idea as to why things function.
They are not adaptable.In order to be truly usefull you need to build a solid understanding of how computers function, how they use memory, how their I/O systems work, and how they communicate.The best way to learn all of these systems is to actually use the computers.
Learn memory management and master difficult concepts.
Knowing Java and C# is great - untill one of your servers starts to crash and everyone is pointing fingers.
Knowing the deep internals will allow you to work as a great asset by debugging the server and fixing the problem - even when that problem is not your code.You real job as a developer is to do just that develop solutions.The most important facet of development is communication.Languages are going to continualy evolve.
Be good at learning, communicating, and developing solutions.
You will often find that every project will require you to either learn new langauages or refine existing skills.Rejoice in your new school.
Sieze every oppurtunity to learn the why behind all of the languages.
Jump on every oppurtunity to branch out (I.E.
take electives in hardware design).Most of all - enjoy the jorney!
I consider Computer Science to be the best job in the world.
There are many days that I wake up in amazement that I am actually paid to do what I love!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669667</id>
	<title>Re:C# and Bing</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1247392380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And after 5 years of Microsoft paying people to use Bing, those Microsoft partners now asking for 5 years of Bing experience can finally collect that payment for playing along.<br>
&nbsp; </p><p>LoB<br>
&nbsp; </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And after 5 years of Microsoft paying people to use Bing , those Microsoft partners now asking for 5 years of Bing experience can finally collect that payment for playing along .
  LoB  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>And after 5 years of Microsoft paying people to use Bing, those Microsoft partners now asking for 5 years of Bing experience can finally collect that payment for playing along.
  LoB
  </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669269</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668977</id>
	<title>Computer Science != Programming</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247429520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Teaching programming in a computer science curriculum is a bit like teaching welding to mechanical engineering students, or construction skills to architecture students: valuable things to know, but not a core part of the intellectual training that the students are paying for.</p><p>With a proper CS background, becoming proficient in a new language should be something you can do quickly and easily because you already have most of the conceptual "hooks" to hang the syntax of the new language on.  If you are getting a CS degree to learn to be a good programmer, you might save some money and look elsewhere.  CS Grad students in top departments write some of the most dreadful, unmaintainable code.</p><p>Focus on the concepts in class, teach yourself to be a good programmer.  You will learn many languages/environments in your career, and there should be nothing particularly special about the first one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Teaching programming in a computer science curriculum is a bit like teaching welding to mechanical engineering students , or construction skills to architecture students : valuable things to know , but not a core part of the intellectual training that the students are paying for.With a proper CS background , becoming proficient in a new language should be something you can do quickly and easily because you already have most of the conceptual " hooks " to hang the syntax of the new language on .
If you are getting a CS degree to learn to be a good programmer , you might save some money and look elsewhere .
CS Grad students in top departments write some of the most dreadful , unmaintainable code.Focus on the concepts in class , teach yourself to be a good programmer .
You will learn many languages/environments in your career , and there should be nothing particularly special about the first one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Teaching programming in a computer science curriculum is a bit like teaching welding to mechanical engineering students, or construction skills to architecture students: valuable things to know, but not a core part of the intellectual training that the students are paying for.With a proper CS background, becoming proficient in a new language should be something you can do quickly and easily because you already have most of the conceptual "hooks" to hang the syntax of the new language on.
If you are getting a CS degree to learn to be a good programmer, you might save some money and look elsewhere.
CS Grad students in top departments write some of the most dreadful, unmaintainable code.Focus on the concepts in class, teach yourself to be a good programmer.
You will learn many languages/environments in your career, and there should be nothing particularly special about the first one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28680763</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247515200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Forget about the specific language... however, not everything is derivative of C/C++ and Java...<br>Depending upon the discipline that you ultimately end up in there are other types such functional (LISP, ML etc) , TIL (Forth, PS etc), domain specific (HTML, XML, CNC, SQL etc.) and others.<br>You should have exposure to many types of languages.<br>You must understand fundamental algorithms.<br>You must understand users (Generally, only experience will help you here. Books are written on the subject but until you can actually relate to the customer you will not understand their needs)<br>Neither WinDOZE nor *UNIX* are the be all end all of OSes. Learn a little about some others as well.<br>Do pick up several scripting language (Perl, Python, Ruby, javascript etc.)<br>An interesting aspect of knowing multiple different languages is that you gather more conceptual tools that will ultimately help you.<br>Do not limit your learning to the class. My personal programming in college consisted of 30\% class (too easy) and 70\% exploring new frontiers. I had more than one class assignment downgraded when I used advanced features not taught in the class (argued back all lost points with you should RTFM and I was within the bounds as defined).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Forget about the specific language... however , not everything is derivative of C/C + + and Java...Depending upon the discipline that you ultimately end up in there are other types such functional ( LISP , ML etc ) , TIL ( Forth , PS etc ) , domain specific ( HTML , XML , CNC , SQL etc .
) and others.You should have exposure to many types of languages.You must understand fundamental algorithms.You must understand users ( Generally , only experience will help you here .
Books are written on the subject but until you can actually relate to the customer you will not understand their needs ) Neither WinDOZE nor * UNIX * are the be all end all of OSes .
Learn a little about some others as well.Do pick up several scripting language ( Perl , Python , Ruby , javascript etc .
) An interesting aspect of knowing multiple different languages is that you gather more conceptual tools that will ultimately help you.Do not limit your learning to the class .
My personal programming in college consisted of 30 \ % class ( too easy ) and 70 \ % exploring new frontiers .
I had more than one class assignment downgraded when I used advanced features not taught in the class ( argued back all lost points with you should RTFM and I was within the bounds as defined ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Forget about the specific language... however, not everything is derivative of C/C++ and Java...Depending upon the discipline that you ultimately end up in there are other types such functional (LISP, ML etc) , TIL (Forth, PS etc), domain specific (HTML, XML, CNC, SQL etc.
) and others.You should have exposure to many types of languages.You must understand fundamental algorithms.You must understand users (Generally, only experience will help you here.
Books are written on the subject but until you can actually relate to the customer you will not understand their needs)Neither WinDOZE nor *UNIX* are the be all end all of OSes.
Learn a little about some others as well.Do pick up several scripting language (Perl, Python, Ruby, javascript etc.
)An interesting aspect of knowing multiple different languages is that you gather more conceptual tools that will ultimately help you.Do not limit your learning to the class.
My personal programming in college consisted of 30\% class (too easy) and 70\% exploring new frontiers.
I had more than one class assignment downgraded when I used advanced features not taught in the class (argued back all lost points with you should RTFM and I was within the bounds as defined).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676093</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247499180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I disagree.  A good degree program teaches you the nuts and bolts of one (at most two) languages in your freshman and sophomore year, then spends the rest of your four years teaching you how to DO things with the language.</p><p>In my college, we learned C, then C++, and then, everything you could do with it (algorithms, networking, operating systems, etc).  This way, we didn't have to waste time learning new languages every semester.  We could focus only on the actual MATERIAL.</p><p>A jack of all trades is a master of none.  Master ONE language, THEN learn everything you can do with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree .
A good degree program teaches you the nuts and bolts of one ( at most two ) languages in your freshman and sophomore year , then spends the rest of your four years teaching you how to DO things with the language.In my college , we learned C , then C + + , and then , everything you could do with it ( algorithms , networking , operating systems , etc ) .
This way , we did n't have to waste time learning new languages every semester .
We could focus only on the actual MATERIAL.A jack of all trades is a master of none .
Master ONE language , THEN learn everything you can do with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree.
A good degree program teaches you the nuts and bolts of one (at most two) languages in your freshman and sophomore year, then spends the rest of your four years teaching you how to DO things with the language.In my college, we learned C, then C++, and then, everything you could do with it (algorithms, networking, operating systems, etc).
This way, we didn't have to waste time learning new languages every semester.
We could focus only on the actual MATERIAL.A jack of all trades is a master of none.
Master ONE language, THEN learn everything you can do with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670051</id>
	<title>Computer science?</title>
	<author>bitemykarma</author>
	<datestamp>1247394900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are you trying to learn computer science, or are you trying to learn a trade?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you trying to learn computer science , or are you trying to learn a trade ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you trying to learn computer science, or are you trying to learn a trade?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673645</id>
	<title>It depends what you want to achieve...</title>
	<author>Agent Whim</author>
	<datestamp>1247479020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work for a very large computer company and deal with customers from big customers as a central part of my job. I discuss their software development practices and their runtime environments routinely. Here are my views on your problem...
<p>
<b>Should I learn lots of languages or not?</b> Will a prospective employer want lower-level skills in lots of languages or higher-level skills in one language? Well, obviously they'll want skills in whatever language they typically use in development, so the trick is going to be choosing the correct small range of languages to learn (possibly one really central one). If you want to study computer programming languages, you will need to study a range. If you thoroughly understand one language, picking up others will be no trouble anyway.
</p><p>
<b>Do I need to learn programming through a formal education process or can I pick it up myself?</b> While it is probably true that most developers learn the languages they use through trial and error, it is also true that most developers create crappy code. You need to understand how to use programming languages properly and a well-structured education will help with this. A really good grounding in general object-oriented software design principles is probably equally valuable here, though.
</p><p>
<b>So which language should I go for?</b> Well, the customers I deal with (banks, petrochemical, manufacturing, public sector...) predominantly use non-Microsoft environments for their servers; mainframe, Linux, HP-UX, AIX and Solaris are all popular, although there are obviously a few MS servers in the mix as well. C# only really runs on Windows (certainly using runtimes which large corporations might choose), so that is going to limit your options. COBOL is widespread and a great choice if you want to spend your life repairing ancient code. FORTRAN isn't used much in business, if at all. Assembly language is far too hard to maintain. Java (JavaEE specifically) runs on all useful platforms and provides a range of options to cover all eventualities. I'd go for Java, but you might have other interests.
</p><p>
<b>Should I be learning programming at all?</b> This is an interesting question. If you're living in a rich country, such as the US or somewhere in Western Europe, you may well find that all the programming jobs you might have wanted to apply for are now available elsewhere - in India or possibly Eastern Europe. You might be better off focussing on design and architecture than real source-level development.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work for a very large computer company and deal with customers from big customers as a central part of my job .
I discuss their software development practices and their runtime environments routinely .
Here are my views on your problem.. . Should I learn lots of languages or not ?
Will a prospective employer want lower-level skills in lots of languages or higher-level skills in one language ?
Well , obviously they 'll want skills in whatever language they typically use in development , so the trick is going to be choosing the correct small range of languages to learn ( possibly one really central one ) .
If you want to study computer programming languages , you will need to study a range .
If you thoroughly understand one language , picking up others will be no trouble anyway .
Do I need to learn programming through a formal education process or can I pick it up myself ?
While it is probably true that most developers learn the languages they use through trial and error , it is also true that most developers create crappy code .
You need to understand how to use programming languages properly and a well-structured education will help with this .
A really good grounding in general object-oriented software design principles is probably equally valuable here , though .
So which language should I go for ?
Well , the customers I deal with ( banks , petrochemical , manufacturing , public sector... ) predominantly use non-Microsoft environments for their servers ; mainframe , Linux , HP-UX , AIX and Solaris are all popular , although there are obviously a few MS servers in the mix as well .
C # only really runs on Windows ( certainly using runtimes which large corporations might choose ) , so that is going to limit your options .
COBOL is widespread and a great choice if you want to spend your life repairing ancient code .
FORTRAN is n't used much in business , if at all .
Assembly language is far too hard to maintain .
Java ( JavaEE specifically ) runs on all useful platforms and provides a range of options to cover all eventualities .
I 'd go for Java , but you might have other interests .
Should I be learning programming at all ?
This is an interesting question .
If you 're living in a rich country , such as the US or somewhere in Western Europe , you may well find that all the programming jobs you might have wanted to apply for are now available elsewhere - in India or possibly Eastern Europe .
You might be better off focussing on design and architecture than real source-level development .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work for a very large computer company and deal with customers from big customers as a central part of my job.
I discuss their software development practices and their runtime environments routinely.
Here are my views on your problem...

Should I learn lots of languages or not?
Will a prospective employer want lower-level skills in lots of languages or higher-level skills in one language?
Well, obviously they'll want skills in whatever language they typically use in development, so the trick is going to be choosing the correct small range of languages to learn (possibly one really central one).
If you want to study computer programming languages, you will need to study a range.
If you thoroughly understand one language, picking up others will be no trouble anyway.
Do I need to learn programming through a formal education process or can I pick it up myself?
While it is probably true that most developers learn the languages they use through trial and error, it is also true that most developers create crappy code.
You need to understand how to use programming languages properly and a well-structured education will help with this.
A really good grounding in general object-oriented software design principles is probably equally valuable here, though.
So which language should I go for?
Well, the customers I deal with (banks, petrochemical, manufacturing, public sector...) predominantly use non-Microsoft environments for their servers; mainframe, Linux, HP-UX, AIX and Solaris are all popular, although there are obviously a few MS servers in the mix as well.
C# only really runs on Windows (certainly using runtimes which large corporations might choose), so that is going to limit your options.
COBOL is widespread and a great choice if you want to spend your life repairing ancient code.
FORTRAN isn't used much in business, if at all.
Assembly language is far too hard to maintain.
Java (JavaEE specifically) runs on all useful platforms and provides a range of options to cover all eventualities.
I'd go for Java, but you might have other interests.
Should I be learning programming at all?
This is an interesting question.
If you're living in a rich country, such as the US or somewhere in Western Europe, you may well find that all the programming jobs you might have wanted to apply for are now available elsewhere - in India or possibly Eastern Europe.
You might be better off focussing on design and architecture than real source-level development.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671189</id>
	<title>What if you were a mechanic?</title>
	<author>NReitzel</author>
	<datestamp>1247405520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look at it this way.  Suppose you wanted to become an auto mechanic.  Which tool would you specialize in?  Would you study crescent wrench?  Or perhaps ball-peen hammer?  Or would you go more mechanized, and study only impact wrench?</p><p>All if this is silly.  Computer languages are tools, not destinations.  You use the language that is appropriate to the task at hand.  If you aren't intimately familiar with that language, snag a couple of books and learn.</p><p>In school, you should be learning approaches to problem solving.  Far too many of the current crop of computer scientists are a whiz at a language, but unfamiliar with the concepts of algorithms and measurement of software solutions.</p><p>A whole lot of the ongoing and multitudinous bugs in Microsoft software stem from the belief, all those years ago, that decades of computer science research simply didn't apply to PC's.</p><p>There is a vast body of knowledge about how to construct reliable software, and how to avoid problems, and not a bit of it worries about whether such software is written in Java, or Eiffel, or C#, or any of the plethora of tools now available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look at it this way .
Suppose you wanted to become an auto mechanic .
Which tool would you specialize in ?
Would you study crescent wrench ?
Or perhaps ball-peen hammer ?
Or would you go more mechanized , and study only impact wrench ? All if this is silly .
Computer languages are tools , not destinations .
You use the language that is appropriate to the task at hand .
If you are n't intimately familiar with that language , snag a couple of books and learn.In school , you should be learning approaches to problem solving .
Far too many of the current crop of computer scientists are a whiz at a language , but unfamiliar with the concepts of algorithms and measurement of software solutions.A whole lot of the ongoing and multitudinous bugs in Microsoft software stem from the belief , all those years ago , that decades of computer science research simply did n't apply to PC 's.There is a vast body of knowledge about how to construct reliable software , and how to avoid problems , and not a bit of it worries about whether such software is written in Java , or Eiffel , or C # , or any of the plethora of tools now available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look at it this way.
Suppose you wanted to become an auto mechanic.
Which tool would you specialize in?
Would you study crescent wrench?
Or perhaps ball-peen hammer?
Or would you go more mechanized, and study only impact wrench?All if this is silly.
Computer languages are tools, not destinations.
You use the language that is appropriate to the task at hand.
If you aren't intimately familiar with that language, snag a couple of books and learn.In school, you should be learning approaches to problem solving.
Far too many of the current crop of computer scientists are a whiz at a language, but unfamiliar with the concepts of algorithms and measurement of software solutions.A whole lot of the ongoing and multitudinous bugs in Microsoft software stem from the belief, all those years ago, that decades of computer science research simply didn't apply to PC's.There is a vast body of knowledge about how to construct reliable software, and how to avoid problems, and not a bit of it worries about whether such software is written in Java, or Eiffel, or C#, or any of the plethora of tools now available.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669087</id>
	<title>You should be asking a different question</title>
	<author>azav</author>
	<datestamp>1247430360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Learn how to work on a team, work with QA, and learn how to deliver products.</p><p>That's what you need to be asking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Learn how to work on a team , work with QA , and learn how to deliver products.That 's what you need to be asking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Learn how to work on a team, work with QA, and learn how to deliver products.That's what you need to be asking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28680599</id>
	<title>Marketability vs Theory</title>
	<author>talldean</author>
	<datestamp>1247514300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Learn how to code in several different styles, and learning any other language becomes pretty darn easy.

I'd say one from each of the following categories:
<ol> <li>C++, Java, C#</li>
<li>Perl, Python, Bash</li>
<li>C</li>
<li>Lisp, ML</li>
</ol><p>
In descending order of marketability for a developer.  If you've got one from each category, no new language is going to challenge you all that much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Learn how to code in several different styles , and learning any other language becomes pretty darn easy .
I 'd say one from each of the following categories : C + + , Java , C # Perl , Python , Bash C Lisp , ML In descending order of marketability for a developer .
If you 've got one from each category , no new language is going to challenge you all that much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Learn how to code in several different styles, and learning any other language becomes pretty darn easy.
I'd say one from each of the following categories:
 C++, Java, C#
Perl, Python, Bash
C
Lisp, ML

In descending order of marketability for a developer.
If you've got one from each category, no new language is going to challenge you all that much.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669153</id>
	<title>Python is the future</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247431020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a Perl lover it really pains me to say it, but Python appears to be really taking off.  You're going to start seeing Python used by businesses in the same way that they've been using Java over the past decade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a Perl lover it really pains me to say it , but Python appears to be really taking off .
You 're going to start seeing Python used by businesses in the same way that they 've been using Java over the past decade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a Perl lover it really pains me to say it, but Python appears to be really taking off.
You're going to start seeing Python used by businesses in the same way that they've been using Java over the past decade.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883</id>
	<title>Go to a "trade school" for that. Not a university</title>
	<author>themeparkphoto</author>
	<datestamp>1247428860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>They shouldn't teach any language. Seriously. Maybe a hypothetical one like MIX or MMIX, but not an actual language.

They should teach math instead.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They should n't teach any language .
Seriously. Maybe a hypothetical one like MIX or MMIX , but not an actual language .
They should teach math instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They shouldn't teach any language.
Seriously. Maybe a hypothetical one like MIX or MMIX, but not an actual language.
They should teach math instead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669177</id>
	<title>This is Comp Sci, not a trade school</title>
	<author>sirwired</author>
	<datestamp>1247431140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are getting a degree in Computer Science, not attending trade school.  Their job is to give you the tools you need to analyze and solve computer problems.  Your career is your job.  If that means obtaining expertise in a particular language on your own, so be it.</p><p>Going over a lot of different languages will give you the tools you need to understand almost any computer language.  In any case, CompSci curriculums don't change nearly fast enough to keep up with Language of the Week.</p><p>It's actually a good thing your school is doing what they are... too many CompSci programs dont.</p><p>SirWired</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are getting a degree in Computer Science , not attending trade school .
Their job is to give you the tools you need to analyze and solve computer problems .
Your career is your job .
If that means obtaining expertise in a particular language on your own , so be it.Going over a lot of different languages will give you the tools you need to understand almost any computer language .
In any case , CompSci curriculums do n't change nearly fast enough to keep up with Language of the Week.It 's actually a good thing your school is doing what they are... too many CompSci programs dont.SirWired</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are getting a degree in Computer Science, not attending trade school.
Their job is to give you the tools you need to analyze and solve computer problems.
Your career is your job.
If that means obtaining expertise in a particular language on your own, so be it.Going over a lot of different languages will give you the tools you need to understand almost any computer language.
In any case, CompSci curriculums don't change nearly fast enough to keep up with Language of the Week.It's actually a good thing your school is doing what they are... too many CompSci programs dont.SirWired</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669761</id>
	<title>My Take</title>
	<author>Sam36</author>
	<datestamp>1247393040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I see alot of people saying that the language doesn't matter to learn CS.  But how can one fully understand how programming works if they don't understand pointers, references, and heap memory (c/c++)?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I see alot of people saying that the language does n't matter to learn CS .
But how can one fully understand how programming works if they do n't understand pointers , references , and heap memory ( c/c + + ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I see alot of people saying that the language doesn't matter to learn CS.
But how can one fully understand how programming works if they don't understand pointers, references, and heap memory (c/c++)?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668893</id>
	<title>Learn how to learn languages</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247428920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Learn how to learn languages. If you can do that, whatever language you need to use for whatever job you end up with can be easily learned. Learn different concepts that are pervasive throughout different langauges, object oriented desgin, memory management, functional techniques, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Learn how to learn languages .
If you can do that , whatever language you need to use for whatever job you end up with can be easily learned .
Learn different concepts that are pervasive throughout different langauges , object oriented desgin , memory management , functional techniques , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Learn how to learn languages.
If you can do that, whatever language you need to use for whatever job you end up with can be easily learned.
Learn different concepts that are pervasive throughout different langauges, object oriented desgin, memory management, functional techniques, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28678857</id>
	<title>Re:3 Languages are a good start</title>
	<author>jknapka</author>
	<datestamp>1247508480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd add a declarative language to that list, such as Prolog, Mercury, Haskell, or (the pure subset of) Scheme.  A year of working with Prolog taught me more about programming (and computer science in general) than any other experience of my 20-year career.

</p><p>

Anyway, after awhile they all start to look like Lisp.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd add a declarative language to that list , such as Prolog , Mercury , Haskell , or ( the pure subset of ) Scheme .
A year of working with Prolog taught me more about programming ( and computer science in general ) than any other experience of my 20-year career .
Anyway , after awhile they all start to look like Lisp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd add a declarative language to that list, such as Prolog, Mercury, Haskell, or (the pure subset of) Scheme.
A year of working with Prolog taught me more about programming (and computer science in general) than any other experience of my 20-year career.
Anyway, after awhile they all start to look like Lisp.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669717</id>
	<title>A CS Curriculum doesn't just teach you languages</title>
	<author>xray84</author>
	<datestamp>1247392680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, it looks to me that the course of study offered to you is quite good. A good Computer Sciences curriculum will teach you the concepts necessary to be an excellent critical thinker and problem solver. After you are solid with the fundamentals, you will realize that learning a new programming language is nothing more than memorizing syntax and library functions. To tell you the truth, after learning the more advanced concepts in the upper level courses, picking up a programming language will be quite easy and even mundane. You will be glad your curriculum didn't waste valuable classroom time "just learning a language," and this is why (at least from my experience), if a CS course offered by a reputable CS department requires that you know, say, straight C as a prerequisite, the department will not spend time teaching it to you, but rather expect that you, as a consummate Computer Scientist, will go and learn the language on your own, and that you should be able to do that well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , it looks to me that the course of study offered to you is quite good .
A good Computer Sciences curriculum will teach you the concepts necessary to be an excellent critical thinker and problem solver .
After you are solid with the fundamentals , you will realize that learning a new programming language is nothing more than memorizing syntax and library functions .
To tell you the truth , after learning the more advanced concepts in the upper level courses , picking up a programming language will be quite easy and even mundane .
You will be glad your curriculum did n't waste valuable classroom time " just learning a language , " and this is why ( at least from my experience ) , if a CS course offered by a reputable CS department requires that you know , say , straight C as a prerequisite , the department will not spend time teaching it to you , but rather expect that you , as a consummate Computer Scientist , will go and learn the language on your own , and that you should be able to do that well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, it looks to me that the course of study offered to you is quite good.
A good Computer Sciences curriculum will teach you the concepts necessary to be an excellent critical thinker and problem solver.
After you are solid with the fundamentals, you will realize that learning a new programming language is nothing more than memorizing syntax and library functions.
To tell you the truth, after learning the more advanced concepts in the upper level courses, picking up a programming language will be quite easy and even mundane.
You will be glad your curriculum didn't waste valuable classroom time "just learning a language," and this is why (at least from my experience), if a CS course offered by a reputable CS department requires that you know, say, straight C as a prerequisite, the department will not spend time teaching it to you, but rather expect that you, as a consummate Computer Scientist, will go and learn the language on your own, and that you should be able to do that well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671379</id>
	<title>Re:Python is the future</title>
	<author>m6ack</author>
	<datestamp>1247407500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As a Perl lover it really pains me to say it...</p></div><p>The $\%&amp;#-based syntax never really turned me on -- but to each his own.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a Perl lover it really pains me to say it...The $ \ % &amp; # -based syntax never really turned me on -- but to each his own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a Perl lover it really pains me to say it...The $\%&amp;#-based syntax never really turned me on -- but to each his own.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670321</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>crispytwo</author>
	<datestamp>1247397360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The "real" world will train you how to be a monkey well enough. </p></div><p>I agree, however, if you just want to learn to program, go to a technical college and learn that way. If you want an education, go to a university.</p><p>When I hire, I look for critical thinking on top of technical knowledge. If you have neither, I'm not interested. If you have one without the other, I'm minorly interested, and I might have a use for someone like that.</p><p>You should know a bunch of different programming languages by the time you're done. And they should be from different categories, like functional, procedural, logical, object oriented. Each have their strengths and weaknesses. And if you haven't written any independent programs to show or tell me by the end of that time, I wonder how interested you really are.</p><p>Also, you should know how to write some prose by the end. Surprisingly, that is not common enough.</p><p>A Bachelors Degree, IMO should be breadth AND depth. A Masters/Doctorate Degree, IMO should be more/much more depth.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The " real " world will train you how to be a monkey well enough .
I agree , however , if you just want to learn to program , go to a technical college and learn that way .
If you want an education , go to a university.When I hire , I look for critical thinking on top of technical knowledge .
If you have neither , I 'm not interested .
If you have one without the other , I 'm minorly interested , and I might have a use for someone like that.You should know a bunch of different programming languages by the time you 're done .
And they should be from different categories , like functional , procedural , logical , object oriented .
Each have their strengths and weaknesses .
And if you have n't written any independent programs to show or tell me by the end of that time , I wonder how interested you really are.Also , you should know how to write some prose by the end .
Surprisingly , that is not common enough.A Bachelors Degree , IMO should be breadth AND depth .
A Masters/Doctorate Degree , IMO should be more/much more depth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "real" world will train you how to be a monkey well enough.
I agree, however, if you just want to learn to program, go to a technical college and learn that way.
If you want an education, go to a university.When I hire, I look for critical thinking on top of technical knowledge.
If you have neither, I'm not interested.
If you have one without the other, I'm minorly interested, and I might have a use for someone like that.You should know a bunch of different programming languages by the time you're done.
And they should be from different categories, like functional, procedural, logical, object oriented.
Each have their strengths and weaknesses.
And if you haven't written any independent programs to show or tell me by the end of that time, I wonder how interested you really are.Also, you should know how to write some prose by the end.
Surprisingly, that is not common enough.A Bachelors Degree, IMO should be breadth AND depth.
A Masters/Doctorate Degree, IMO should be more/much more depth.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669797</id>
	<title>Communication is most important of all!</title>
	<author>rlk</author>
	<datestamp>1247393220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the debate about concepts vs. specific languages, one thing is missing: the most important skills in the "real world" are communication skills.  It hardly matters how good of a programmer you are; if you can't communicate, you're going nowhere.  That means being able to speak clearly and coherently, write well, understand and respond to other people's communications, and so forth.  You could be a god-like programmer, but if nobody can understand what you're doing, your code won't be of much use and you won't be asked to do anything of interest because nobody will know what you can do.  One of the best CS classes I took at MIT, about 25 years ago, had no programming or even design component whatsoever.  It was called Computer Systems Engineering, 6.033 if I recall correctly.  The common joke about it was that it was a humanities class.  That's because the work involved reading a substantial body of material each week (often some of the major foundation papers of the field) and writing critiques.  There were in addition two term papers, which involved architecting a solution to a particular problem (no design work here -- just the architecture).  My observation was that students either loved it or hated it.  The ones who hated it were the ones who just wanted to get down and dirty with coding.  The ones who liked it were the ones who had good communication skills who wanted to really understand the field.</p><p>As far as the language issue goes, are you looking for a trade school or a professional education?  Languages will come and go.  If you have a sound technical base, you can pick up the fundamentals of any new language quickly enough, and languages constantly evolve anyway (C++ today isn't what it was 10 years ago, and who knows what the language de l'heur will be in 2 years, anyway).  I learned JavaScript a few years ago while hacking on an internal tool to generate bug reports (something I've used for years to assist me in managing projects) -- someone wanted a more interactive experience.  I'm no JavaScript expert, but I picked up the basics quickly enough -- and more importantly, because of my basic background in interface design, algorithms and optimization, my reporting tool is very fast, and the JavaScript can be used by anyone else in the company who wants to do similar manipulations on HTML tables.  Similarly, I learned Python about 6 months ago because a planning tool I wanted to use was written in Python, but I wanted to add some new features, speed it up, and fix some bugs.  No classes, no books, just reading the code and doing some Google searches when I needed to learn more about wxPython.  When I was an undergrad, the only programming classes offered by the CS department used Scheme and CLU -- two languages with no significant commercial value even then (at that time, the commercially interesting languages were Fortran, Cobol, and C).  Why?  Because those languages had features that were particularly good for teaching the desired concepts.</p><p>Also, learning programming isn't very expensive.  As others have said, you can learn a lot on your own at the cost of the computer that you already have.  Better yet, you can create or work on something useful in the FOSS world.</p><p>When I've interviewed candidates for engineering jobs (both as a manager and as an engineer), I've never been concerned with "what languages or libraries does this person know".  Depending upon the seniority of the person, I'm looking for good reasoning capability, ability to execute, and ability to communicate.  I hired a fantastic engineer out of school.  What set her apart from everyone else was her ability to explain why she did something.  She didn't merely recite her class projects, she explained why she made engineering choices that she did in a way that was more than enough to demonstrate her technical chops, and her explanations were clear, and she could answer questions in a way that showed real understanding.  Since my group was distributed (most of the people were on the other side of the country), communication</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the debate about concepts vs. specific languages , one thing is missing : the most important skills in the " real world " are communication skills .
It hardly matters how good of a programmer you are ; if you ca n't communicate , you 're going nowhere .
That means being able to speak clearly and coherently , write well , understand and respond to other people 's communications , and so forth .
You could be a god-like programmer , but if nobody can understand what you 're doing , your code wo n't be of much use and you wo n't be asked to do anything of interest because nobody will know what you can do .
One of the best CS classes I took at MIT , about 25 years ago , had no programming or even design component whatsoever .
It was called Computer Systems Engineering , 6.033 if I recall correctly .
The common joke about it was that it was a humanities class .
That 's because the work involved reading a substantial body of material each week ( often some of the major foundation papers of the field ) and writing critiques .
There were in addition two term papers , which involved architecting a solution to a particular problem ( no design work here -- just the architecture ) .
My observation was that students either loved it or hated it .
The ones who hated it were the ones who just wanted to get down and dirty with coding .
The ones who liked it were the ones who had good communication skills who wanted to really understand the field.As far as the language issue goes , are you looking for a trade school or a professional education ?
Languages will come and go .
If you have a sound technical base , you can pick up the fundamentals of any new language quickly enough , and languages constantly evolve anyway ( C + + today is n't what it was 10 years ago , and who knows what the language de l'heur will be in 2 years , anyway ) .
I learned JavaScript a few years ago while hacking on an internal tool to generate bug reports ( something I 've used for years to assist me in managing projects ) -- someone wanted a more interactive experience .
I 'm no JavaScript expert , but I picked up the basics quickly enough -- and more importantly , because of my basic background in interface design , algorithms and optimization , my reporting tool is very fast , and the JavaScript can be used by anyone else in the company who wants to do similar manipulations on HTML tables .
Similarly , I learned Python about 6 months ago because a planning tool I wanted to use was written in Python , but I wanted to add some new features , speed it up , and fix some bugs .
No classes , no books , just reading the code and doing some Google searches when I needed to learn more about wxPython .
When I was an undergrad , the only programming classes offered by the CS department used Scheme and CLU -- two languages with no significant commercial value even then ( at that time , the commercially interesting languages were Fortran , Cobol , and C ) .
Why ? Because those languages had features that were particularly good for teaching the desired concepts.Also , learning programming is n't very expensive .
As others have said , you can learn a lot on your own at the cost of the computer that you already have .
Better yet , you can create or work on something useful in the FOSS world.When I 've interviewed candidates for engineering jobs ( both as a manager and as an engineer ) , I 've never been concerned with " what languages or libraries does this person know " .
Depending upon the seniority of the person , I 'm looking for good reasoning capability , ability to execute , and ability to communicate .
I hired a fantastic engineer out of school .
What set her apart from everyone else was her ability to explain why she did something .
She did n't merely recite her class projects , she explained why she made engineering choices that she did in a way that was more than enough to demonstrate her technical chops , and her explanations were clear , and she could answer questions in a way that showed real understanding .
Since my group was distributed ( most of the people were on the other side of the country ) , communication</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the debate about concepts vs. specific languages, one thing is missing: the most important skills in the "real world" are communication skills.
It hardly matters how good of a programmer you are; if you can't communicate, you're going nowhere.
That means being able to speak clearly and coherently, write well, understand and respond to other people's communications, and so forth.
You could be a god-like programmer, but if nobody can understand what you're doing, your code won't be of much use and you won't be asked to do anything of interest because nobody will know what you can do.
One of the best CS classes I took at MIT, about 25 years ago, had no programming or even design component whatsoever.
It was called Computer Systems Engineering, 6.033 if I recall correctly.
The common joke about it was that it was a humanities class.
That's because the work involved reading a substantial body of material each week (often some of the major foundation papers of the field) and writing critiques.
There were in addition two term papers, which involved architecting a solution to a particular problem (no design work here -- just the architecture).
My observation was that students either loved it or hated it.
The ones who hated it were the ones who just wanted to get down and dirty with coding.
The ones who liked it were the ones who had good communication skills who wanted to really understand the field.As far as the language issue goes, are you looking for a trade school or a professional education?
Languages will come and go.
If you have a sound technical base, you can pick up the fundamentals of any new language quickly enough, and languages constantly evolve anyway (C++ today isn't what it was 10 years ago, and who knows what the language de l'heur will be in 2 years, anyway).
I learned JavaScript a few years ago while hacking on an internal tool to generate bug reports (something I've used for years to assist me in managing projects) -- someone wanted a more interactive experience.
I'm no JavaScript expert, but I picked up the basics quickly enough -- and more importantly, because of my basic background in interface design, algorithms and optimization, my reporting tool is very fast, and the JavaScript can be used by anyone else in the company who wants to do similar manipulations on HTML tables.
Similarly, I learned Python about 6 months ago because a planning tool I wanted to use was written in Python, but I wanted to add some new features, speed it up, and fix some bugs.
No classes, no books, just reading the code and doing some Google searches when I needed to learn more about wxPython.
When I was an undergrad, the only programming classes offered by the CS department used Scheme and CLU -- two languages with no significant commercial value even then (at that time, the commercially interesting languages were Fortran, Cobol, and C).
Why?  Because those languages had features that were particularly good for teaching the desired concepts.Also, learning programming isn't very expensive.
As others have said, you can learn a lot on your own at the cost of the computer that you already have.
Better yet, you can create or work on something useful in the FOSS world.When I've interviewed candidates for engineering jobs (both as a manager and as an engineer), I've never been concerned with "what languages or libraries does this person know".
Depending upon the seniority of the person, I'm looking for good reasoning capability, ability to execute, and ability to communicate.
I hired a fantastic engineer out of school.
What set her apart from everyone else was her ability to explain why she did something.
She didn't merely recite her class projects, she explained why she made engineering choices that she did in a way that was more than enough to demonstrate her technical chops, and her explanations were clear, and she could answer questions in a way that showed real understanding.
Since my group was distributed (most of the people were on the other side of the country), communication</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673903</id>
	<title>Re:You should be asking a different question</title>
	<author>dkf</author>
	<datestamp>1247482140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Learn how to work on a team, work with QA, and learn how to deliver products.</p><p>That's what you need to be asking.</p></div><p>Only after you've grokked the fundamentals, which that proper CS degree seems to be about teaching. Otherwise you won't have any real idea what's actually possible, and what shouldn't be tried (either because it is stupid, or because it is impossible). Some people grok some parts of CS intuitively, but they should focus on understanding more of the bits that they find hard so that they get the whole lot.</p><p>Once you've got the basics (especially data structures and algorithms, but not just that) then, if you want, go the way described by the parent because you'll be prepared to know what is right and what isn't. Launch straight into it, and you'll just be using a bunch of ideas in a disconnected way and won't be able to advance your career nearly so fast.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Learn how to work on a team , work with QA , and learn how to deliver products.That 's what you need to be asking.Only after you 've grokked the fundamentals , which that proper CS degree seems to be about teaching .
Otherwise you wo n't have any real idea what 's actually possible , and what should n't be tried ( either because it is stupid , or because it is impossible ) .
Some people grok some parts of CS intuitively , but they should focus on understanding more of the bits that they find hard so that they get the whole lot.Once you 've got the basics ( especially data structures and algorithms , but not just that ) then , if you want , go the way described by the parent because you 'll be prepared to know what is right and what is n't .
Launch straight into it , and you 'll just be using a bunch of ideas in a disconnected way and wo n't be able to advance your career nearly so fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Learn how to work on a team, work with QA, and learn how to deliver products.That's what you need to be asking.Only after you've grokked the fundamentals, which that proper CS degree seems to be about teaching.
Otherwise you won't have any real idea what's actually possible, and what shouldn't be tried (either because it is stupid, or because it is impossible).
Some people grok some parts of CS intuitively, but they should focus on understanding more of the bits that they find hard so that they get the whole lot.Once you've got the basics (especially data structures and algorithms, but not just that) then, if you want, go the way described by the parent because you'll be prepared to know what is right and what isn't.
Launch straight into it, and you'll just be using a bunch of ideas in a disconnected way and won't be able to advance your career nearly so fast.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28684371</id>
	<title>Asembly? Nah....</title>
	<author>liquidsgi</author>
	<datestamp>1247488800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Weird-- Oracle isn't a language-- it is a database. You can use SQL(which is a language) on Oracle(database). I am not sure why they are still teachning assembly-- most view assembly as not really helpful in an academic environment as we now have and have had compilers for ages that work well and well if you want to write a compiler 1. you are a geek and 2. you are reinventing the wheel. Believe me, with the other items on that list-- there is more than enough for a Bachelors.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Weird-- Oracle is n't a language-- it is a database .
You can use SQL ( which is a language ) on Oracle ( database ) .
I am not sure why they are still teachning assembly-- most view assembly as not really helpful in an academic environment as we now have and have had compilers for ages that work well and well if you want to write a compiler 1. you are a geek and 2. you are reinventing the wheel .
Believe me , with the other items on that list-- there is more than enough for a Bachelors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Weird-- Oracle isn't a language-- it is a database.
You can use SQL(which is a language) on Oracle(database).
I am not sure why they are still teachning assembly-- most view assembly as not really helpful in an academic environment as we now have and have had compilers for ages that work well and well if you want to write a compiler 1. you are a geek and 2. you are reinventing the wheel.
Believe me, with the other items on that list-- there is more than enough for a Bachelors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670345</id>
	<title>Mix is good, plus functional programming</title>
	<author>Cato</author>
	<datestamp>1247397540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Overall that sounds like a pretty good mix of languages.  Far more important to get a wide understanding of different approaches than to learn any one language exclusively, and in the short term a mix is also much more marketable.</p><p>The only omission is functional programming, which is not yet commercially important but is incredibly powerful - one example is mlvirsh, which is a rewrite in the OCaml functional language of a C-based library, reducing number of lines of code by 85\% - see <a href="http://libvirt.org/ocaml/README.txt" title="libvirt.org">http://libvirt.org/ocaml/README.txt</a> [libvirt.org] for the stats.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Overall that sounds like a pretty good mix of languages .
Far more important to get a wide understanding of different approaches than to learn any one language exclusively , and in the short term a mix is also much more marketable.The only omission is functional programming , which is not yet commercially important but is incredibly powerful - one example is mlvirsh , which is a rewrite in the OCaml functional language of a C-based library , reducing number of lines of code by 85 \ % - see http : //libvirt.org/ocaml/README.txt [ libvirt.org ] for the stats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Overall that sounds like a pretty good mix of languages.
Far more important to get a wide understanding of different approaches than to learn any one language exclusively, and in the short term a mix is also much more marketable.The only omission is functional programming, which is not yet commercially important but is incredibly powerful - one example is mlvirsh, which is a rewrite in the OCaml functional language of a C-based library, reducing number of lines of code by 85\% - see http://libvirt.org/ocaml/README.txt [libvirt.org] for the stats.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671309</id>
	<title>French</title>
	<author>Hawthorne01</author>
	<datestamp>1247406840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All my geek friends mocked me for taking such a prissy language in college, but it was the only guy amongst the 20+ girls in class.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All my geek friends mocked me for taking such a prissy language in college , but it was the only guy amongst the 20 + girls in class .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All my geek friends mocked me for taking such a prissy language in college, but it was the only guy amongst the 20+ girls in class.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672285</id>
	<title>Re:Communication is most important of all!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247416080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I fully agree with the response. University education is about learning problem solving - with humans, computers and all related parts. The difference between an Auto Engineer and an auto mechanic is that the engineer designs and the mechanics maintains the auto with all sorts of tools in his/her tool box. But in both the cases, problem solving - understanding the basic problem and providing novel, cost effective and good solution are the keys for the success of the person. Leaning many different types of concept loaded programming languages gives the student wide array of tools and to select an appropriate one for a given task. Documentation, which is a dirty word, without which no program can be modified or enhanced for future use. So, the linguistic models and the CS concepts will make a wonderful software engineer. Of course, learning to interact with others and communicate effectively using visuals and spelling out why a particular approach was selected makes the person very valuable. It is true that most managers are idiots and have insecurity, yet a highly  competent CS guy will always find job or will eventually become an enterprenur.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I fully agree with the response .
University education is about learning problem solving - with humans , computers and all related parts .
The difference between an Auto Engineer and an auto mechanic is that the engineer designs and the mechanics maintains the auto with all sorts of tools in his/her tool box .
But in both the cases , problem solving - understanding the basic problem and providing novel , cost effective and good solution are the keys for the success of the person .
Leaning many different types of concept loaded programming languages gives the student wide array of tools and to select an appropriate one for a given task .
Documentation , which is a dirty word , without which no program can be modified or enhanced for future use .
So , the linguistic models and the CS concepts will make a wonderful software engineer .
Of course , learning to interact with others and communicate effectively using visuals and spelling out why a particular approach was selected makes the person very valuable .
It is true that most managers are idiots and have insecurity , yet a highly competent CS guy will always find job or will eventually become an enterprenur .
       </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fully agree with the response.
University education is about learning problem solving - with humans, computers and all related parts.
The difference between an Auto Engineer and an auto mechanic is that the engineer designs and the mechanics maintains the auto with all sorts of tools in his/her tool box.
But in both the cases, problem solving - understanding the basic problem and providing novel, cost effective and good solution are the keys for the success of the person.
Leaning many different types of concept loaded programming languages gives the student wide array of tools and to select an appropriate one for a given task.
Documentation, which is a dirty word, without which no program can be modified or enhanced for future use.
So, the linguistic models and the CS concepts will make a wonderful software engineer.
Of course, learning to interact with others and communicate effectively using visuals and spelling out why a particular approach was selected makes the person very valuable.
It is true that most managers are idiots and have insecurity, yet a highly  competent CS guy will always find job or will eventually become an enterprenur.
       </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669797</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670605</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe you're the wrong place</title>
	<author>gmccloskey</author>
	<datestamp>1247399880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>+1 to the above.</p><p>As they're offering you a range of experiences, it would be beneficial to learn functional programming, procedural programming, parallel programming. Oh and lisp. If you get a good understanding of the similarities and differences of func vs procedural, and teh thought processes on how to solve problems with them, you'll do just fine. Parallel programming (SIMD / MIMD) is only going to become more and more important as the number of cores in common use rises.</p><p>The actual implementation of each functional / procedural language is largely irrelevant - it's learning how to think and solve problems in their respective paradigms.</p><p>LISP is a great teacher - derided for the brackets, it is incredibly powerful and based on extremely fundamental maths. Using a handful of operators, you can do the most amazing things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>+ 1 to the above.As they 're offering you a range of experiences , it would be beneficial to learn functional programming , procedural programming , parallel programming .
Oh and lisp .
If you get a good understanding of the similarities and differences of func vs procedural , and teh thought processes on how to solve problems with them , you 'll do just fine .
Parallel programming ( SIMD / MIMD ) is only going to become more and more important as the number of cores in common use rises.The actual implementation of each functional / procedural language is largely irrelevant - it 's learning how to think and solve problems in their respective paradigms.LISP is a great teacher - derided for the brackets , it is incredibly powerful and based on extremely fundamental maths .
Using a handful of operators , you can do the most amazing things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>+1 to the above.As they're offering you a range of experiences, it would be beneficial to learn functional programming, procedural programming, parallel programming.
Oh and lisp.
If you get a good understanding of the similarities and differences of func vs procedural, and teh thought processes on how to solve problems with them, you'll do just fine.
Parallel programming (SIMD / MIMD) is only going to become more and more important as the number of cores in common use rises.The actual implementation of each functional / procedural language is largely irrelevant - it's learning how to think and solve problems in their respective paradigms.LISP is a great teacher - derided for the brackets, it is incredibly powerful and based on extremely fundamental maths.
Using a handful of operators, you can do the most amazing things.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670945</id>
	<title>as a hiring manager</title>
	<author>cathector</author>
	<datestamp>1247403300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the main thing i'm going to look for is<br>* someone who can think like a computer, i don't care in what language<br>* someone with a portfolio: what have you actually built, and can you show it to me ?</p><p>i would suggest focusing on the advanced conceptual stuff as much as possible. you'll pick up whatever languages you need along the way, but it's much more difficult to just ambiently pick up a proper understanding of algorithms, computational complexity, math, and statistics (and physics if you're interested in say game programming).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the main thing i 'm going to look for is * someone who can think like a computer , i do n't care in what language * someone with a portfolio : what have you actually built , and can you show it to me ? i would suggest focusing on the advanced conceptual stuff as much as possible .
you 'll pick up whatever languages you need along the way , but it 's much more difficult to just ambiently pick up a proper understanding of algorithms , computational complexity , math , and statistics ( and physics if you 're interested in say game programming ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the main thing i'm going to look for is* someone who can think like a computer, i don't care in what language* someone with a portfolio: what have you actually built, and can you show it to me ?i would suggest focusing on the advanced conceptual stuff as much as possible.
you'll pick up whatever languages you need along the way, but it's much more difficult to just ambiently pick up a proper understanding of algorithms, computational complexity, math, and statistics (and physics if you're interested in say game programming).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670341</id>
	<title>Computer science is not computer programming...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247397540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What programming languages you know is really beside the point. Computer science is about algorithmic math, problem modeling, combinatorics, etc. Computer programming is the easy bit, you should be able to pick up just about any of them pretty quickly because, as a computer scientist, you'll understand how the languages work, why they work that way, and so on. Sure, you're not going to know the ins and outs of specific libraries and APIs, but you'll have the skills and, hopefully, documentation necessary to use that as required.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What programming languages you know is really beside the point .
Computer science is about algorithmic math , problem modeling , combinatorics , etc .
Computer programming is the easy bit , you should be able to pick up just about any of them pretty quickly because , as a computer scientist , you 'll understand how the languages work , why they work that way , and so on .
Sure , you 're not going to know the ins and outs of specific libraries and APIs , but you 'll have the skills and , hopefully , documentation necessary to use that as required .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What programming languages you know is really beside the point.
Computer science is about algorithmic math, problem modeling, combinatorics, etc.
Computer programming is the easy bit, you should be able to pick up just about any of them pretty quickly because, as a computer scientist, you'll understand how the languages work, why they work that way, and so on.
Sure, you're not going to know the ins and outs of specific libraries and APIs, but you'll have the skills and, hopefully, documentation necessary to use that as required.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669557</id>
	<title>Re:Languages don't matter</title>
	<author>ameline</author>
	<datestamp>1247391600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree,</p><p>A long time ago now (mid 1980s), when I was interviewing for one of my first programming jobs, the interviewer asked me what was different about C vs other languages.</p><p>My answer was that is it easier to spell.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p>The interviewer looked a little puzzled -- I explained that while I was trying to be funny, I was also being serious -- C is not really any different than any algol type language. If I could identify any way in which it differed, I would say that in C, the pointer is the primary datatype, where in other languages of this family, this is less true. And that C had a very minimilast approach to the core language, preferring to leave heavy lifting to the standard library, as opposed to building things into the syntax of the core language. But that these are mere subtleties.</p><p>The fundamental difference remains that it is easier to spell.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree,A long time ago now ( mid 1980s ) , when I was interviewing for one of my first programming jobs , the interviewer asked me what was different about C vs other languages.My answer was that is it easier to spell .
: - ) The interviewer looked a little puzzled -- I explained that while I was trying to be funny , I was also being serious -- C is not really any different than any algol type language .
If I could identify any way in which it differed , I would say that in C , the pointer is the primary datatype , where in other languages of this family , this is less true .
And that C had a very minimilast approach to the core language , preferring to leave heavy lifting to the standard library , as opposed to building things into the syntax of the core language .
But that these are mere subtleties.The fundamental difference remains that it is easier to spell .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree,A long time ago now (mid 1980s), when I was interviewing for one of my first programming jobs, the interviewer asked me what was different about C vs other languages.My answer was that is it easier to spell.
:-)The interviewer looked a little puzzled -- I explained that while I was trying to be funny, I was also being serious -- C is not really any different than any algol type language.
If I could identify any way in which it differed, I would say that in C, the pointer is the primary datatype, where in other languages of this family, this is less true.
And that C had a very minimilast approach to the core language, preferring to leave heavy lifting to the standard library, as opposed to building things into the syntax of the core language.
But that these are mere subtleties.The fundamental difference remains that it is easier to spell.
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669031</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670365</id>
	<title>Good Choice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247397660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's a good list of languages being taught at the university. To be well-rounded in programming, you need to exposed to different programming paradigms. Object Oriented, Imperative, Functional are the most popular. You also need to be exposed to light weight scripting like Bash and on the other extreme low level systems programming in C and Assembly. But as you pointed out, merely knowing the concepts will not get you anywhere. You need to work on your own personal projects and code in your free time to get good at this. A lot of people I know, are very good in programming in college, but they just can't do any real life coding. Only when you start coding on your own can you make your bag of tricks and solve problems creatively.</p><p>So ya, Java/Python, C, Assembly, ML/Haskell, Ruby/Perl is generally a good list of languages to choose from</p><p>--- Shahriar</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a good list of languages being taught at the university .
To be well-rounded in programming , you need to exposed to different programming paradigms .
Object Oriented , Imperative , Functional are the most popular .
You also need to be exposed to light weight scripting like Bash and on the other extreme low level systems programming in C and Assembly .
But as you pointed out , merely knowing the concepts will not get you anywhere .
You need to work on your own personal projects and code in your free time to get good at this .
A lot of people I know , are very good in programming in college , but they just ca n't do any real life coding .
Only when you start coding on your own can you make your bag of tricks and solve problems creatively.So ya , Java/Python , C , Assembly , ML/Haskell , Ruby/Perl is generally a good list of languages to choose from--- Shahriar</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a good list of languages being taught at the university.
To be well-rounded in programming, you need to exposed to different programming paradigms.
Object Oriented, Imperative, Functional are the most popular.
You also need to be exposed to light weight scripting like Bash and on the other extreme low level systems programming in C and Assembly.
But as you pointed out, merely knowing the concepts will not get you anywhere.
You need to work on your own personal projects and code in your free time to get good at this.
A lot of people I know, are very good in programming in college, but they just can't do any real life coding.
Only when you start coding on your own can you make your bag of tricks and solve problems creatively.So ya, Java/Python, C, Assembly, ML/Haskell, Ruby/Perl is generally a good list of languages to choose from--- Shahriar</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671055</id>
	<title>Intercal</title>
	<author>Mesa MIke</author>
	<datestamp>1247404140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you can master that, you have proven yourself as a programmer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you can master that , you have proven yourself as a programmer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you can master that, you have proven yourself as a programmer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669091</id>
	<title>Re:Go to a "trade school" for that. Not a universi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247430360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no, in a CS degree you take a compilers course and learn something like C++ in a few days to do your homework. you don't take a language course where they teach you C++</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no , in a CS degree you take a compilers course and learn something like C + + in a few days to do your homework .
you do n't take a language course where they teach you C + +</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no, in a CS degree you take a compilers course and learn something like C++ in a few days to do your homework.
you don't take a language course where they teach you C++</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668959</id>
	<title>Seems normal for the good CS departments.</title>
	<author>guacamole</author>
	<datestamp>1247429400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you're lucky to have even those language courses offered. At my school, CS department only taught  Java and Lisp (barely). All advanced courses are about abstract concepts rather than specific languages. Of course, to be able to succeed in the program you need to know how to program in a variety of languages. However, specific languages is something that you learn on your own. That's how the good CS departments operate. Once you understand the abstract concepts, picking up a new language should be easy on your own. This is how it's done in the real world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 're lucky to have even those language courses offered .
At my school , CS department only taught Java and Lisp ( barely ) .
All advanced courses are about abstract concepts rather than specific languages .
Of course , to be able to succeed in the program you need to know how to program in a variety of languages .
However , specific languages is something that you learn on your own .
That 's how the good CS departments operate .
Once you understand the abstract concepts , picking up a new language should be easy on your own .
This is how it 's done in the real world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you're lucky to have even those language courses offered.
At my school, CS department only taught  Java and Lisp (barely).
All advanced courses are about abstract concepts rather than specific languages.
Of course, to be able to succeed in the program you need to know how to program in a variety of languages.
However, specific languages is something that you learn on your own.
That's how the good CS departments operate.
Once you understand the abstract concepts, picking up a new language should be easy on your own.
This is how it's done in the real world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669219</id>
	<title>Sounds like you're getting a good education</title>
	<author>plopez</author>
	<datestamp>1247431680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While you're at it make sure you get exposed to a Lisp based programming language, transaction processing and understand databases. It sounds like a real college so use your free electives to work on your written and oral communications.<br>E.g English and public speaking oriented classes. Classes in Psychology and Sociology will help too, you need to learn to understand people who don't think like you do.</p><p>People who go to diploma mills get ripped off.</p><p>Enjoy it. It can be fun.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While you 're at it make sure you get exposed to a Lisp based programming language , transaction processing and understand databases .
It sounds like a real college so use your free electives to work on your written and oral communications.E.g English and public speaking oriented classes .
Classes in Psychology and Sociology will help too , you need to learn to understand people who do n't think like you do.People who go to diploma mills get ripped off.Enjoy it .
It can be fun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While you're at it make sure you get exposed to a Lisp based programming language, transaction processing and understand databases.
It sounds like a real college so use your free electives to work on your written and oral communications.E.g English and public speaking oriented classes.
Classes in Psychology and Sociology will help too, you need to learn to understand people who don't think like you do.People who go to diploma mills get ripped off.Enjoy it.
It can be fun.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669553</id>
	<title>Need to decide what you want first</title>
	<author>sempuki</author>
	<datestamp>1247391540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Need to decide what you want first: do you want language training programme to land you the next job, or an education to last you a whole career?

If you want to join faceless, replaceable, assembly-line coders belching out reams of cookie-cutter flavor-of-the-month, go with the language training program.

If you want the *chance* to ascend that race, and create something new and valuable, you'll need to first learn how to think.

As someone who has been responsible for hiring, I have no interest in employing the first category of developers.

Real value is in doing something never done before, and for that you'll need to be able to think independently. The implementation details, such as choice of problem domain appropriate language, will be up to you -- so you'd better know more than one, and it better not take more than a week to get functional in it.

Moreover, if you intend to be promoted beyond coding some day, you'll need other skills besides Java.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Need to decide what you want first : do you want language training programme to land you the next job , or an education to last you a whole career ?
If you want to join faceless , replaceable , assembly-line coders belching out reams of cookie-cutter flavor-of-the-month , go with the language training program .
If you want the * chance * to ascend that race , and create something new and valuable , you 'll need to first learn how to think .
As someone who has been responsible for hiring , I have no interest in employing the first category of developers .
Real value is in doing something never done before , and for that you 'll need to be able to think independently .
The implementation details , such as choice of problem domain appropriate language , will be up to you -- so you 'd better know more than one , and it better not take more than a week to get functional in it .
Moreover , if you intend to be promoted beyond coding some day , you 'll need other skills besides Java .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Need to decide what you want first: do you want language training programme to land you the next job, or an education to last you a whole career?
If you want to join faceless, replaceable, assembly-line coders belching out reams of cookie-cutter flavor-of-the-month, go with the language training program.
If you want the *chance* to ascend that race, and create something new and valuable, you'll need to first learn how to think.
As someone who has been responsible for hiring, I have no interest in employing the first category of developers.
Real value is in doing something never done before, and for that you'll need to be able to think independently.
The implementation details, such as choice of problem domain appropriate language, will be up to you -- so you'd better know more than one, and it better not take more than a week to get functional in it.
Moreover, if you intend to be promoted beyond coding some day, you'll need other skills besides Java.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28683701</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247484720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree.  It's best to learn the concepts because then you can apply that to any language.  I've seen time and time again programmers who are one-trick ponies who write bloated software and wonder why it doesn't work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
It 's best to learn the concepts because then you can apply that to any language .
I 've seen time and time again programmers who are one-trick ponies who write bloated software and wonder why it does n't work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
It's best to learn the concepts because then you can apply that to any language.
I've seen time and time again programmers who are one-trick ponies who write bloated software and wonder why it doesn't work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671503</id>
	<title>Also...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247408520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also, if you're REALLY that worried, just learn to do every exercise for Lisp, C++, Java, whatever you're doing in school, in the language of your choice as well.  Don't try to undercut your branching out and learning other language - that will just weaken you in the long run.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , if you 're REALLY that worried , just learn to do every exercise for Lisp , C + + , Java , whatever you 're doing in school , in the language of your choice as well .
Do n't try to undercut your branching out and learning other language - that will just weaken you in the long run .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, if you're REALLY that worried, just learn to do every exercise for Lisp, C++, Java, whatever you're doing in school, in the language of your choice as well.
Don't try to undercut your branching out and learning other language - that will just weaken you in the long run.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671121</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>linzeal</author>
	<datestamp>1247404740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thats fine and dandy, but the world outside academia does not hire computer scientists they hire programmers and developers.  Just like as a mechanical engineer there are a multitude of cad and multiphysics tools and I'm glad they drilled one into to me in my associates at a community college because while the breadth of the education I got at a liberal arts school was also important, even vital to my employability nothing is more valuable to me in my day to day activity than knowing the ins and outs of the CAD software the company where I work for uses almost innately so I can worry about the higher level engineering task at hand.</p><p>There are two ways to master a skill or art in this world.  One can be taught to labor to reproduce what is already known to work or one can go off on their own with their own philosophy, theory and methodology and attempt to find something else that works.  Both followed dogmatically tend to work but they do not always produce the expected results as you can't teach creativity.  Many people who graduate college in the United States become disillusioned with their abilities after they realized they have been coddled to expect their input to be valued as equal to everyone else's.  This is not the case when you have no idea on how to do proper memory management in C because you were only taught every other language on the face on the earth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thats fine and dandy , but the world outside academia does not hire computer scientists they hire programmers and developers .
Just like as a mechanical engineer there are a multitude of cad and multiphysics tools and I 'm glad they drilled one into to me in my associates at a community college because while the breadth of the education I got at a liberal arts school was also important , even vital to my employability nothing is more valuable to me in my day to day activity than knowing the ins and outs of the CAD software the company where I work for uses almost innately so I can worry about the higher level engineering task at hand.There are two ways to master a skill or art in this world .
One can be taught to labor to reproduce what is already known to work or one can go off on their own with their own philosophy , theory and methodology and attempt to find something else that works .
Both followed dogmatically tend to work but they do not always produce the expected results as you ca n't teach creativity .
Many people who graduate college in the United States become disillusioned with their abilities after they realized they have been coddled to expect their input to be valued as equal to everyone else 's .
This is not the case when you have no idea on how to do proper memory management in C because you were only taught every other language on the face on the earth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thats fine and dandy, but the world outside academia does not hire computer scientists they hire programmers and developers.
Just like as a mechanical engineer there are a multitude of cad and multiphysics tools and I'm glad they drilled one into to me in my associates at a community college because while the breadth of the education I got at a liberal arts school was also important, even vital to my employability nothing is more valuable to me in my day to day activity than knowing the ins and outs of the CAD software the company where I work for uses almost innately so I can worry about the higher level engineering task at hand.There are two ways to master a skill or art in this world.
One can be taught to labor to reproduce what is already known to work or one can go off on their own with their own philosophy, theory and methodology and attempt to find something else that works.
Both followed dogmatically tend to work but they do not always produce the expected results as you can't teach creativity.
Many people who graduate college in the United States become disillusioned with their abilities after they realized they have been coddled to expect their input to be valued as equal to everyone else's.
This is not the case when you have no idea on how to do proper memory management in C because you were only taught every other language on the face on the earth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28680271</id>
	<title>They are doing right by you..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247513040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>    Your new college knows exactly what they are doing. Well at least by exposing you to multiple languages. Hopefully, they are also giving you a strong learning foundation on which to build future knowledge. Because trust me, the language you learn today is unlikely to be the language in use tomorrow.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; When you first get out of school you'll find that many positions in software development wants "real world" experience. The only way I found to break through this barrier was to show them how quickly I could learn new languages because of the good foundation my education gave me. I'd make it your goal to learn the details of how programming languages work and how to develop logical algorithmic solutions to problems. These skills will undoubtedly come in handy as soon as the next greatest programming language ever comes out.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;^)</p><p>Learn software development.... not languages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your new college knows exactly what they are doing .
Well at least by exposing you to multiple languages .
Hopefully , they are also giving you a strong learning foundation on which to build future knowledge .
Because trust me , the language you learn today is unlikely to be the language in use tomorrow .
        When you first get out of school you 'll find that many positions in software development wants " real world " experience .
The only way I found to break through this barrier was to show them how quickly I could learn new languages because of the good foundation my education gave me .
I 'd make it your goal to learn the details of how programming languages work and how to develop logical algorithmic solutions to problems .
These skills will undoubtedly come in handy as soon as the next greatest programming language ever comes out .
; ^ ) Learn software development.... not languages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>    Your new college knows exactly what they are doing.
Well at least by exposing you to multiple languages.
Hopefully, they are also giving you a strong learning foundation on which to build future knowledge.
Because trust me, the language you learn today is unlikely to be the language in use tomorrow.
        When you first get out of school you'll find that many positions in software development wants "real world" experience.
The only way I found to break through this barrier was to show them how quickly I could learn new languages because of the good foundation my education gave me.
I'd make it your goal to learn the details of how programming languages work and how to develop logical algorithmic solutions to problems.
These skills will undoubtedly come in handy as soon as the next greatest programming language ever comes out.
;^)Learn software development.... not languages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671833</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>Pseudonym</author>
	<datestamp>1247411640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>About 80\% of the software engineering market is about fixing the impedance mismatch between half a dozen off-the-shelf legacy systems and getting them to work together.  This is the world of customer requirements, filing bugs with vendors, business rules, sorting out SQL variants,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET and TPS reports.</p><p>The other 20\% is in writing those systems or stuff you can't get off the shelf for people who really need it.  This is the world of R&amp;D, resource management, high-performance, real-time, scientific, numeric, visualisation, embedded, crypto, machine learning, metal, speed and danger.</p><p>Now, which of these do you want to do for a living?</p><p>Last year, I was writing firmware for nanotech devices.  I implemented shell sort.  Do you remember shell sort?  I'm glad I had a broad CS education which told me what it shell sort was, because it was exactly the right trade-off (small-to-medium amounts of data, with practically no working memory to spare).</p><p>This year I'm helping find disease outbreaks before they happen.  I had to implement a suffix array.  Do you remember what a suffix array is and what it's for?  I didn't learn this as an undergrad (that was a while ago), but thanks to my broad CS education, I knew what I needed to find out.</p><p>A pilot will probably never have to safely ditch an airliner in the ocean at any point in their career.  But there's no way in hell that I'm hiring one that doesn't know how to do it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>About 80 \ % of the software engineering market is about fixing the impedance mismatch between half a dozen off-the-shelf legacy systems and getting them to work together .
This is the world of customer requirements , filing bugs with vendors , business rules , sorting out SQL variants , .NET and TPS reports.The other 20 \ % is in writing those systems or stuff you ca n't get off the shelf for people who really need it .
This is the world of R&amp;D , resource management , high-performance , real-time , scientific , numeric , visualisation , embedded , crypto , machine learning , metal , speed and danger.Now , which of these do you want to do for a living ? Last year , I was writing firmware for nanotech devices .
I implemented shell sort .
Do you remember shell sort ?
I 'm glad I had a broad CS education which told me what it shell sort was , because it was exactly the right trade-off ( small-to-medium amounts of data , with practically no working memory to spare ) .This year I 'm helping find disease outbreaks before they happen .
I had to implement a suffix array .
Do you remember what a suffix array is and what it 's for ?
I did n't learn this as an undergrad ( that was a while ago ) , but thanks to my broad CS education , I knew what I needed to find out.A pilot will probably never have to safely ditch an airliner in the ocean at any point in their career .
But there 's no way in hell that I 'm hiring one that does n't know how to do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>About 80\% of the software engineering market is about fixing the impedance mismatch between half a dozen off-the-shelf legacy systems and getting them to work together.
This is the world of customer requirements, filing bugs with vendors, business rules, sorting out SQL variants, .NET and TPS reports.The other 20\% is in writing those systems or stuff you can't get off the shelf for people who really need it.
This is the world of R&amp;D, resource management, high-performance, real-time, scientific, numeric, visualisation, embedded, crypto, machine learning, metal, speed and danger.Now, which of these do you want to do for a living?Last year, I was writing firmware for nanotech devices.
I implemented shell sort.
Do you remember shell sort?
I'm glad I had a broad CS education which told me what it shell sort was, because it was exactly the right trade-off (small-to-medium amounts of data, with practically no working memory to spare).This year I'm helping find disease outbreaks before they happen.
I had to implement a suffix array.
Do you remember what a suffix array is and what it's for?
I didn't learn this as an undergrad (that was a while ago), but thanks to my broad CS education, I knew what I needed to find out.A pilot will probably never have to safely ditch an airliner in the ocean at any point in their career.
But there's no way in hell that I'm hiring one that doesn't know how to do it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670189</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670979</id>
	<title>Complain, complain, complain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247403600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If they teach us only one language, we complain that we're only getting taught one language and that it's not enough.<br>If they teach us many different languages and more higher level concepts, we complain that they don't focus enough on one language.<br>We're a fussy bunch hey?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If they teach us only one language , we complain that we 're only getting taught one language and that it 's not enough.If they teach us many different languages and more higher level concepts , we complain that they do n't focus enough on one language.We 're a fussy bunch hey ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If they teach us only one language, we complain that we're only getting taught one language and that it's not enough.If they teach us many different languages and more higher level concepts, we complain that they don't focus enough on one language.We're a fussy bunch hey?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675161</id>
	<title>Perspective: Job Market</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247494980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>let's keep this topic relative to a career...</p><p>Yes, you need to be interested in programming, know the concepts, etc... but in a more practical (career-wise) approach...</p><p>More often than not, YOU do NOT dictate the programming language... at least not initially (and to do this *requires* familiarity with multiple languages, strengths and weaknesses). So... you absolutely SHOULD be comfortable with more than 1 language.</p><p>I would probably choose between hardware interaction (low level languages), and application development (no device drivers, etc... also uses higher languages)... then become familiar with 3 to 6 of them.</p><p>I prefer app development, and I'm profecient with VB.Net and C# (yes, I'm on the MS side) and SQL. I'm familiar with: C++, Java. My hobby time will explore F#.</p><p>If I were to be on the hardware side, I'd probably choose: Assembly, C, C++ (maybe C# since it supports inline assembly and such).</p><p>Web dev would probably include: ASP.Net (VB or C#), Silverlight, Flash, JavaScript (maybe Java applets).</p><p>Other esoteric languages exist as well, such as Extreme or Cobol... I'm aware of an ERP that uses FoxPro. (and I've had to support that at times).</p><p>find your interests, then figure out which languages are most common/useful. All languages will have their strengths and weaknesses... and eventually they blend (generics and functional programming in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net) as they mature. Knowing the concepts and benefits helps take advantage of these new features as they become available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>let 's keep this topic relative to a career...Yes , you need to be interested in programming , know the concepts , etc... but in a more practical ( career-wise ) approach...More often than not , YOU do NOT dictate the programming language... at least not initially ( and to do this * requires * familiarity with multiple languages , strengths and weaknesses ) .
So... you absolutely SHOULD be comfortable with more than 1 language.I would probably choose between hardware interaction ( low level languages ) , and application development ( no device drivers , etc... also uses higher languages ) ... then become familiar with 3 to 6 of them.I prefer app development , and I 'm profecient with VB.Net and C # ( yes , I 'm on the MS side ) and SQL .
I 'm familiar with : C + + , Java .
My hobby time will explore F # .If I were to be on the hardware side , I 'd probably choose : Assembly , C , C + + ( maybe C # since it supports inline assembly and such ) .Web dev would probably include : ASP.Net ( VB or C # ) , Silverlight , Flash , JavaScript ( maybe Java applets ) .Other esoteric languages exist as well , such as Extreme or Cobol... I 'm aware of an ERP that uses FoxPro .
( and I 've had to support that at times ) .find your interests , then figure out which languages are most common/useful .
All languages will have their strengths and weaknesses... and eventually they blend ( generics and functional programming in .Net ) as they mature .
Knowing the concepts and benefits helps take advantage of these new features as they become available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>let's keep this topic relative to a career...Yes, you need to be interested in programming, know the concepts, etc... but in a more practical (career-wise) approach...More often than not, YOU do NOT dictate the programming language... at least not initially (and to do this *requires* familiarity with multiple languages, strengths and weaknesses).
So... you absolutely SHOULD be comfortable with more than 1 language.I would probably choose between hardware interaction (low level languages), and application development (no device drivers, etc... also uses higher languages)... then become familiar with 3 to 6 of them.I prefer app development, and I'm profecient with VB.Net and C# (yes, I'm on the MS side) and SQL.
I'm familiar with: C++, Java.
My hobby time will explore F#.If I were to be on the hardware side, I'd probably choose: Assembly, C, C++ (maybe C# since it supports inline assembly and such).Web dev would probably include: ASP.Net (VB or C#), Silverlight, Flash, JavaScript (maybe Java applets).Other esoteric languages exist as well, such as Extreme or Cobol... I'm aware of an ERP that uses FoxPro.
(and I've had to support that at times).find your interests, then figure out which languages are most common/useful.
All languages will have their strengths and weaknesses... and eventually they blend (generics and functional programming in .Net) as they mature.
Knowing the concepts and benefits helps take advantage of these new features as they become available.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673071</id>
	<title>CIS vs CS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247426820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of my professors said, "If you wanted to learn a programming language or tool, you should have majored in Computer Information Systems.  Computer Science teaches you the foundation and from that you will be able to understand the languages and tools that are built on that foundation."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of my professors said , " If you wanted to learn a programming language or tool , you should have majored in Computer Information Systems .
Computer Science teaches you the foundation and from that you will be able to understand the languages and tools that are built on that foundation .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of my professors said, "If you wanted to learn a programming language or tool, you should have majored in Computer Information Systems.
Computer Science teaches you the foundation and from that you will be able to understand the languages and tools that are built on that foundation.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28702561</id>
	<title>Flexibility</title>
	<author>Geminii</author>
	<datestamp>1247667720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When an interviewer says "Here's the spec for an internal language we use. You have one hour to write a program in this language which includes the following standard functions...", which school would you have liked to have been taught at?
<p>
As an IT grad, or even as a non-grad IT person, you'll find yourself in situations where you're thrown in the deep end with nothing more than some outdated refs - if you're lucky. You've got to be able to instantly scrape together fragments of data into a coherent framework and put that framework to use before your boss starts handing out pink slips. I'm not even a programmer and I've been hauled off on no notice to write some nationwide corporate application in a language I'd never seen to that point, simply because I made the mistake of mentioning I'd once tinkered with Perl for a couple of days.
</p><p>
Learn how to whip up basic versions of standard libraries in double-quick time. Not in one language, but in as many as you can lay your hands on. C. C++. Java. Python. Ruby. Haskell. Fortran. Perl. Befunge. Bash. Freakin' DOS batch code. Focus not on the vagaries of a single method, but on being able to feel the flow and curl of logic states and data. That way, it won't matter what language is in vogue by the time you hit the workforce, you'll be able to pick it up, swing it a few times to get the heft, and be ready to play ball.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When an interviewer says " Here 's the spec for an internal language we use .
You have one hour to write a program in this language which includes the following standard functions... " , which school would you have liked to have been taught at ?
As an IT grad , or even as a non-grad IT person , you 'll find yourself in situations where you 're thrown in the deep end with nothing more than some outdated refs - if you 're lucky .
You 've got to be able to instantly scrape together fragments of data into a coherent framework and put that framework to use before your boss starts handing out pink slips .
I 'm not even a programmer and I 've been hauled off on no notice to write some nationwide corporate application in a language I 'd never seen to that point , simply because I made the mistake of mentioning I 'd once tinkered with Perl for a couple of days .
Learn how to whip up basic versions of standard libraries in double-quick time .
Not in one language , but in as many as you can lay your hands on .
C. C + + .
Java. Python .
Ruby. Haskell .
Fortran. Perl .
Befunge. Bash .
Freakin ' DOS batch code .
Focus not on the vagaries of a single method , but on being able to feel the flow and curl of logic states and data .
That way , it wo n't matter what language is in vogue by the time you hit the workforce , you 'll be able to pick it up , swing it a few times to get the heft , and be ready to play ball .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When an interviewer says "Here's the spec for an internal language we use.
You have one hour to write a program in this language which includes the following standard functions...", which school would you have liked to have been taught at?
As an IT grad, or even as a non-grad IT person, you'll find yourself in situations where you're thrown in the deep end with nothing more than some outdated refs - if you're lucky.
You've got to be able to instantly scrape together fragments of data into a coherent framework and put that framework to use before your boss starts handing out pink slips.
I'm not even a programmer and I've been hauled off on no notice to write some nationwide corporate application in a language I'd never seen to that point, simply because I made the mistake of mentioning I'd once tinkered with Perl for a couple of days.
Learn how to whip up basic versions of standard libraries in double-quick time.
Not in one language, but in as many as you can lay your hands on.
C. C++.
Java. Python.
Ruby. Haskell.
Fortran. Perl.
Befunge. Bash.
Freakin' DOS batch code.
Focus not on the vagaries of a single method, but on being able to feel the flow and curl of logic states and data.
That way, it won't matter what language is in vogue by the time you hit the workforce, you'll be able to pick it up, swing it a few times to get the heft, and be ready to play ball.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671221</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247405940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so what degree program ought i pursue in order to become a monkey? how i love those cute little guys...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so what degree program ought i pursue in order to become a monkey ?
how i love those cute little guys.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so what degree program ought i pursue in order to become a monkey?
how i love those cute little guys...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669721</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247392680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Choosing a main language will have a big impact on where your career heads, but I can tell you *one* thing that you should learn, regardless of your direction, and that is Object Oriented design. I'm an evolved procedural language dinosaur, so I had to learn OO on my own to stay employed. Now, I see young CS grads who know the OO jargon but don't seem to really understand it, just as many old procedural programmers never really grasped top-down. OO is very powerful, but only if you actually use it, and that requires a depth of understanding that many seem to lack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Choosing a main language will have a big impact on where your career heads , but I can tell you * one * thing that you should learn , regardless of your direction , and that is Object Oriented design .
I 'm an evolved procedural language dinosaur , so I had to learn OO on my own to stay employed .
Now , I see young CS grads who know the OO jargon but do n't seem to really understand it , just as many old procedural programmers never really grasped top-down .
OO is very powerful , but only if you actually use it , and that requires a depth of understanding that many seem to lack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Choosing a main language will have a big impact on where your career heads, but I can tell you *one* thing that you should learn, regardless of your direction, and that is Object Oriented design.
I'm an evolved procedural language dinosaur, so I had to learn OO on my own to stay employed.
Now, I see young CS grads who know the OO jargon but don't seem to really understand it, just as many old procedural programmers never really grasped top-down.
OO is very powerful, but only if you actually use it, and that requires a depth of understanding that many seem to lack.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669419</id>
	<title>You have been blessed</title>
	<author>SL Baur</author>
	<datestamp>1247390340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do not take this golden opportunity and flush it down the toilet.  A specific programming language is irrelevant to skill in programming.</p><p>(Writing as someone who has interviewed programmers for positions before).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do not take this golden opportunity and flush it down the toilet .
A specific programming language is irrelevant to skill in programming .
( Writing as someone who has interviewed programmers for positions before ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do not take this golden opportunity and flush it down the toilet.
A specific programming language is irrelevant to skill in programming.
(Writing as someone who has interviewed programmers for positions before).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676471</id>
	<title>Find the language the generates the most money...</title>
	<author>gestalt\_n\_pepper</author>
	<datestamp>1247500680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And learn that. Programming is about money or it's mental masturbation (not that there's anything wrong with that!).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And learn that .
Programming is about money or it 's mental masturbation ( not that there 's anything wrong with that !
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And learn that.
Programming is about money or it's mental masturbation (not that there's anything wrong with that!
).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669191</id>
	<title>Re:Go to a "trade school" for that. Not a universi</title>
	<author>turbidostato</author>
	<datestamp>1247431320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"They shouldn't teach any language. Seriously."</p><p>Well, maybe English.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" They should n't teach any language .
Seriously. " Well , maybe English .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"They shouldn't teach any language.
Seriously."Well, maybe English.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676185</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe you're the wrong place</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247499660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NO, you've got it all wrong.  Your analogy is totally arsed up.</p><p>IT is about how to use the software that exists.  This is knowing how to use the plowshare in the field.</p><p>Software engineering is about how to design and construct a plowshare using known principles, manufacture it and distribute it to farmers (who will use it in the field).</p><p>Computer science is about the physics of plowshares, pure science.  Existing plowshares are studied to see how their metallurgy affects their use in the field, they're subjected to tests to see whether different hardnesses of steel will affect their usability, new shapes of plowshare are tried out and evaluated, and scientists try to replace the plowshare with something else, like genetically engineered moles that dig the holes for you.</p><p>You "I'm a computer scientist" freaks are so far up your own butts you can't even make a good analogy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NO , you 've got it all wrong .
Your analogy is totally arsed up.IT is about how to use the software that exists .
This is knowing how to use the plowshare in the field.Software engineering is about how to design and construct a plowshare using known principles , manufacture it and distribute it to farmers ( who will use it in the field ) .Computer science is about the physics of plowshares , pure science .
Existing plowshares are studied to see how their metallurgy affects their use in the field , they 're subjected to tests to see whether different hardnesses of steel will affect their usability , new shapes of plowshare are tried out and evaluated , and scientists try to replace the plowshare with something else , like genetically engineered moles that dig the holes for you.You " I 'm a computer scientist " freaks are so far up your own butts you ca n't even make a good analogy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NO, you've got it all wrong.
Your analogy is totally arsed up.IT is about how to use the software that exists.
This is knowing how to use the plowshare in the field.Software engineering is about how to design and construct a plowshare using known principles, manufacture it and distribute it to farmers (who will use it in the field).Computer science is about the physics of plowshares, pure science.
Existing plowshares are studied to see how their metallurgy affects their use in the field, they're subjected to tests to see whether different hardnesses of steel will affect their usability, new shapes of plowshare are tried out and evaluated, and scientists try to replace the plowshare with something else, like genetically engineered moles that dig the holes for you.You "I'm a computer scientist" freaks are so far up your own butts you can't even make a good analogy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669209</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669587</id>
	<title>Think in language groups</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247391780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you know one language in a group of languages, chances are that you could teach your self another. In the list you mention I don't see any functional languages. For example Haskell, which has lazy evaluation, would be a good candidate. (google a haskell implementation of Sieve of Eratosthenes for an eye opener). One of the language trends is to surrender the idea that one language fits all problems.  Expect to meet lots of new small languages on your way. As an example, the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net runtime is designed to let different languages interoperate in the same application.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you know one language in a group of languages , chances are that you could teach your self another .
In the list you mention I do n't see any functional languages .
For example Haskell , which has lazy evaluation , would be a good candidate .
( google a haskell implementation of Sieve of Eratosthenes for an eye opener ) .
One of the language trends is to surrender the idea that one language fits all problems .
Expect to meet lots of new small languages on your way .
As an example , the .Net runtime is designed to let different languages interoperate in the same application .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you know one language in a group of languages, chances are that you could teach your self another.
In the list you mention I don't see any functional languages.
For example Haskell, which has lazy evaluation, would be a good candidate.
(google a haskell implementation of Sieve of Eratosthenes for an eye opener).
One of the language trends is to surrender the idea that one language fits all problems.
Expect to meet lots of new small languages on your way.
As an example, the .Net runtime is designed to let different languages interoperate in the same application.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670067</id>
	<title>No school does "real" programming anyway</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1247395020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's the thing.  Let's say you find a school, that uses just one language and covers it "in depth".</p><p>What does that even mean?  Out in the real world, especially iT, no-one is going to think any of the programming experience you had is college is worth much at all.  The projects are generally too contrived, and do not present real-world problems that you have with a real team and real customers and real businesses owners and so forth.</p><p>So when looking at hiring someone, I'm going to be a lot more impressed with someone who has had a variety of language experiences than someone with a single language and also no real projects.  Now if you say you've used multiple languages I may well test you on that, so be prepared to back up what you say you know - but also it's OK to say that you're really rusty with some language so that if you make syntax mistakes we understand why.</p><p>It's also way more fun and practical knowing multiple languages, because you never know when adopting an approach from one language even if you are working with another may come in handy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's the thing .
Let 's say you find a school , that uses just one language and covers it " in depth " .What does that even mean ?
Out in the real world , especially iT , no-one is going to think any of the programming experience you had is college is worth much at all .
The projects are generally too contrived , and do not present real-world problems that you have with a real team and real customers and real businesses owners and so forth.So when looking at hiring someone , I 'm going to be a lot more impressed with someone who has had a variety of language experiences than someone with a single language and also no real projects .
Now if you say you 've used multiple languages I may well test you on that , so be prepared to back up what you say you know - but also it 's OK to say that you 're really rusty with some language so that if you make syntax mistakes we understand why.It 's also way more fun and practical knowing multiple languages , because you never know when adopting an approach from one language even if you are working with another may come in handy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's the thing.
Let's say you find a school, that uses just one language and covers it "in depth".What does that even mean?
Out in the real world, especially iT, no-one is going to think any of the programming experience you had is college is worth much at all.
The projects are generally too contrived, and do not present real-world problems that you have with a real team and real customers and real businesses owners and so forth.So when looking at hiring someone, I'm going to be a lot more impressed with someone who has had a variety of language experiences than someone with a single language and also no real projects.
Now if you say you've used multiple languages I may well test you on that, so be prepared to back up what you say you know - but also it's OK to say that you're really rusty with some language so that if you make syntax mistakes we understand why.It's also way more fun and practical knowing multiple languages, because you never know when adopting an approach from one language even if you are working with another may come in handy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28687219</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247513760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But, hell, the problem is, a programming language doesn't get famous immediately after it's born, and a language worths little in the industry before it became famous.</p><p>C came out in an era filled with languages like LISP, Fortran, and even Pascal, and it TOOK TIME for the C language to dominate the whole industry. In the old days, my teachers taught only Pascal, C was totally ignored. Yes, a language can have been around for a long time, but this doesn't mean that it's considered useful in all that period. And, as I can see, most languages' "useful period" is way shorter than their "existing period". C and C++? It just happens that we are in the time when these languages are in their best days.</p><p>"a programming class 30 years ago"? I bet it's full of Fortran or something alike, and there was no pattern, no component, no "engineering" stuff. And, how many companys out there still use Fortran as "working language"? The market is a bitch, she can only get laid by the most popular ones, not the oldest ones.</p><p>So if I may suggest, I'll say pick some new, promising stuff, and BE A PRO OF IT. Read about the old languages only if doing that will help you better understand the new language.</p><p>BTW, Fortran came out about 20 years earlier than C, so let's see what'll happen to the C language in 20 years....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But , hell , the problem is , a programming language does n't get famous immediately after it 's born , and a language worths little in the industry before it became famous.C came out in an era filled with languages like LISP , Fortran , and even Pascal , and it TOOK TIME for the C language to dominate the whole industry .
In the old days , my teachers taught only Pascal , C was totally ignored .
Yes , a language can have been around for a long time , but this does n't mean that it 's considered useful in all that period .
And , as I can see , most languages ' " useful period " is way shorter than their " existing period " .
C and C + + ?
It just happens that we are in the time when these languages are in their best days .
" a programming class 30 years ago " ?
I bet it 's full of Fortran or something alike , and there was no pattern , no component , no " engineering " stuff .
And , how many companys out there still use Fortran as " working language " ?
The market is a bitch , she can only get laid by the most popular ones , not the oldest ones.So if I may suggest , I 'll say pick some new , promising stuff , and BE A PRO OF IT .
Read about the old languages only if doing that will help you better understand the new language.BTW , Fortran came out about 20 years earlier than C , so let 's see what 'll happen to the C language in 20 years... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But, hell, the problem is, a programming language doesn't get famous immediately after it's born, and a language worths little in the industry before it became famous.C came out in an era filled with languages like LISP, Fortran, and even Pascal, and it TOOK TIME for the C language to dominate the whole industry.
In the old days, my teachers taught only Pascal, C was totally ignored.
Yes, a language can have been around for a long time, but this doesn't mean that it's considered useful in all that period.
And, as I can see, most languages' "useful period" is way shorter than their "existing period".
C and C++?
It just happens that we are in the time when these languages are in their best days.
"a programming class 30 years ago"?
I bet it's full of Fortran or something alike, and there was no pattern, no component, no "engineering" stuff.
And, how many companys out there still use Fortran as "working language"?
The market is a bitch, she can only get laid by the most popular ones, not the oldest ones.So if I may suggest, I'll say pick some new, promising stuff, and BE A PRO OF IT.
Read about the old languages only if doing that will help you better understand the new language.BTW, Fortran came out about 20 years earlier than C, so let's see what'll happen to the C language in 20 years....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669429</id>
	<title>Computer Science at rdg.ac.uk</title>
	<author>Antony T Curtis</author>
	<datestamp>1247390460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I went to university, they used a Modula-2 variant for imperative programming, Poplog (Prolog+Lisp variant) for AI and I have forgotten what was the language for functional programming but it was another oddball one.<br>Anyways... The argument for it was: You won't encounter these languages in the "real world (tm)" but everything you learn can be transplanted into whatever languages you need to use.<br>In the final year, some C/C++/Java was looked at as a means to transplant the knowledge learnt earlier.</p><p>To be honest: When I started at university, I was already a proficient at C, C++, Turbo Pascal and 80386 assembly so I mostly went to get the piece of paper. I guess another reason why they used an in-house modified language for teaching is that it puts everyone at the starting point for those languages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I went to university , they used a Modula-2 variant for imperative programming , Poplog ( Prolog + Lisp variant ) for AI and I have forgotten what was the language for functional programming but it was another oddball one.Anyways... The argument for it was : You wo n't encounter these languages in the " real world ( tm ) " but everything you learn can be transplanted into whatever languages you need to use.In the final year , some C/C + + /Java was looked at as a means to transplant the knowledge learnt earlier.To be honest : When I started at university , I was already a proficient at C , C + + , Turbo Pascal and 80386 assembly so I mostly went to get the piece of paper .
I guess another reason why they used an in-house modified language for teaching is that it puts everyone at the starting point for those languages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I went to university, they used a Modula-2 variant for imperative programming, Poplog (Prolog+Lisp variant) for AI and I have forgotten what was the language for functional programming but it was another oddball one.Anyways... The argument for it was: You won't encounter these languages in the "real world (tm)" but everything you learn can be transplanted into whatever languages you need to use.In the final year, some C/C++/Java was looked at as a means to transplant the knowledge learnt earlier.To be honest: When I started at university, I was already a proficient at C, C++, Turbo Pascal and 80386 assembly so I mostly went to get the piece of paper.
I guess another reason why they used an in-house modified language for teaching is that it puts everyone at the starting point for those languages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675181</id>
	<title>Do you want an education or a jobs certificate?</title>
	<author>Assmasher</author>
	<datestamp>1247495100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It sounds like your new school is trying to give you an education.  In my personal and professional opinion, your computer science degree should not be illuminating you on the method of preventing memory fragmentation in C++, it should be teaching you about how languages (such as C++) ultimately make use of hardware (such as memory) and what the potential unexpected pitfalls could be.  You shouldn't be thinking of your degree as a 'degree in ' but as a degree in computational science (or similar.)  Sadly, there are many schools out there that have 'Computer Science' degrees that are, in actuality, software engineering degrees - or worse - programming degrees.  Now, my school was very heavy on theory, but the practical applications of that theory in the labs and software projects were language independent.  The profs didn't care what you used as long as it worked well (stable/useful) and your code looked like you'd given some thought to its design and layout<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;).  Needless to say, only about 10\% of the people who started CSCI at this school finished - not because it was particularly difficult (though it wasn't easy) but because it rapidly separated those who wanted to tinker from those who really were interested in computing.</p><p>Anyhow, I think you should be glad that your new school doesn't focus on a given language but instead on theory.  Now, it is up to you to develop the practical skills to embrace and extend (and perhaps extinguish) those theories.</p><p>It is very easy to get to know a language intimately, write complete applications - not samples.</p><p>Good luck<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds like your new school is trying to give you an education .
In my personal and professional opinion , your computer science degree should not be illuminating you on the method of preventing memory fragmentation in C + + , it should be teaching you about how languages ( such as C + + ) ultimately make use of hardware ( such as memory ) and what the potential unexpected pitfalls could be .
You should n't be thinking of your degree as a 'degree in ' but as a degree in computational science ( or similar .
) Sadly , there are many schools out there that have 'Computer Science ' degrees that are , in actuality , software engineering degrees - or worse - programming degrees .
Now , my school was very heavy on theory , but the practical applications of that theory in the labs and software projects were language independent .
The profs did n't care what you used as long as it worked well ( stable/useful ) and your code looked like you 'd given some thought to its design and layout ; ) .
Needless to say , only about 10 \ % of the people who started CSCI at this school finished - not because it was particularly difficult ( though it was n't easy ) but because it rapidly separated those who wanted to tinker from those who really were interested in computing.Anyhow , I think you should be glad that your new school does n't focus on a given language but instead on theory .
Now , it is up to you to develop the practical skills to embrace and extend ( and perhaps extinguish ) those theories.It is very easy to get to know a language intimately , write complete applications - not samples.Good luck : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds like your new school is trying to give you an education.
In my personal and professional opinion, your computer science degree should not be illuminating you on the method of preventing memory fragmentation in C++, it should be teaching you about how languages (such as C++) ultimately make use of hardware (such as memory) and what the potential unexpected pitfalls could be.
You shouldn't be thinking of your degree as a 'degree in ' but as a degree in computational science (or similar.
)  Sadly, there are many schools out there that have 'Computer Science' degrees that are, in actuality, software engineering degrees - or worse - programming degrees.
Now, my school was very heavy on theory, but the practical applications of that theory in the labs and software projects were language independent.
The profs didn't care what you used as long as it worked well (stable/useful) and your code looked like you'd given some thought to its design and layout ;).
Needless to say, only about 10\% of the people who started CSCI at this school finished - not because it was particularly difficult (though it wasn't easy) but because it rapidly separated those who wanted to tinker from those who really were interested in computing.Anyhow, I think you should be glad that your new school doesn't focus on a given language but instead on theory.
Now, it is up to you to develop the practical skills to embrace and extend (and perhaps extinguish) those theories.It is very easy to get to know a language intimately, write complete applications - not samples.Good luck :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669315</id>
	<title>The real world of head hunters and HR depts.</title>
	<author>Theovon</author>
	<datestamp>1247389320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With respect to actually knowing things and getting work done, it's better to understand computer science concepts in general then to know obscure details of one or a few particular languages.  But keep in mind that the people who hire progammers are not themselves programmers.  Head hunters and HR departments are generally non-technical and will not understand (or care) if you talk about these concepts.  The fact is, unless you're getting a Ph.D., you have to tailor your resume to be consumed by a half-broken computer program with multiple choice check boxes, and that is how you're going to be judged.  It doesn't matter if you know C++, Java, Lisp, Ruby, PHP5, Python, Haskell, and assembly for 10 different processors.  If the job calls for C#, and you don't claim to know it, you won't even be considered.  If you DO claim to know it, it's hit or miss whether or not you'll be tested on it.  I've actually gotten less than perfect scores on C and C++ tests due to things that I KNOW are wrong with the test, so you're up against that too.  As much as you have to know computer science, you also have to know how to game the system.</p><p>Here's what has worked for me:</p><p>(1) Know your concepts well.  Know how to take any program and implement it in pseudocode.  Learn how to do it in structured, object oriented, and functional languages.  This will help you actually get the job done and get raises and stuff once you're hired.<br>(2) Find out what languages are hot and read at least one small tutorial on each, and write programs in each of at least, say, 1000 lines.  Whatever it takes to get used to the basics.  Also, read the wikipedia articles and google for "trick and tips" and "gochas" and other things that people praise or gripe about for those languages.  Get your feet wet.  This way, you can then claim that you have programmed in each of those languages, and you can answer some of the weirder questions someone might ask.<br>(3) Familiarize yourself with different types programming environments or platforms.  Program something on Windows.  Program something on a Mac (if you can get your hands on one easily enough).  Program something on Linux.  Program something on an embedded system or at least a language used on them.</p><p>You have to lie judiciously.  For instance, my background included assembly for several processors, C, C++, for modern system as well as things like 6502's, along with a fair amount of chip design experience.  Could I do embedded systems programming?  Duh.  But at this one point, I didn't have any ACTUAL embedded systems programming experience.  So I was honest and explained that while I hadn't, I clearly had enough related experience that was easy.  I didn't get the job.  What I should have done was done a bit of reading on the subject to ensure that I know the names of a few embedded processors and bluffed my way through.  The problem was that the head hunter wasn't technical enough to understand my explanation, so all he knew to do was check "NO" on the embedded systems experience.  He can comment in there about the chip design, but the HR people he would hand this off to wouldn't know what do do with it.</p><p>To summarize, to prepare yourself for working in the IT industry, you have to learn programming, but more importantly, you have to learn how to translate what you know into the language of the nontechnical people who do the hiring.  This requires a kind of intelligence (subterfuge, to a limited extent) that many technophiles are not very skilled at.  If you don't you give away control to the people who understand the art of deception better than they understand technical things.  But those are the ones who rule the world.  Politicians succeed not by knowing things but by knowing how to SPIN things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With respect to actually knowing things and getting work done , it 's better to understand computer science concepts in general then to know obscure details of one or a few particular languages .
But keep in mind that the people who hire progammers are not themselves programmers .
Head hunters and HR departments are generally non-technical and will not understand ( or care ) if you talk about these concepts .
The fact is , unless you 're getting a Ph.D. , you have to tailor your resume to be consumed by a half-broken computer program with multiple choice check boxes , and that is how you 're going to be judged .
It does n't matter if you know C + + , Java , Lisp , Ruby , PHP5 , Python , Haskell , and assembly for 10 different processors .
If the job calls for C # , and you do n't claim to know it , you wo n't even be considered .
If you DO claim to know it , it 's hit or miss whether or not you 'll be tested on it .
I 've actually gotten less than perfect scores on C and C + + tests due to things that I KNOW are wrong with the test , so you 're up against that too .
As much as you have to know computer science , you also have to know how to game the system.Here 's what has worked for me : ( 1 ) Know your concepts well .
Know how to take any program and implement it in pseudocode .
Learn how to do it in structured , object oriented , and functional languages .
This will help you actually get the job done and get raises and stuff once you 're hired .
( 2 ) Find out what languages are hot and read at least one small tutorial on each , and write programs in each of at least , say , 1000 lines .
Whatever it takes to get used to the basics .
Also , read the wikipedia articles and google for " trick and tips " and " gochas " and other things that people praise or gripe about for those languages .
Get your feet wet .
This way , you can then claim that you have programmed in each of those languages , and you can answer some of the weirder questions someone might ask .
( 3 ) Familiarize yourself with different types programming environments or platforms .
Program something on Windows .
Program something on a Mac ( if you can get your hands on one easily enough ) .
Program something on Linux .
Program something on an embedded system or at least a language used on them.You have to lie judiciously .
For instance , my background included assembly for several processors , C , C + + , for modern system as well as things like 6502 's , along with a fair amount of chip design experience .
Could I do embedded systems programming ?
Duh. But at this one point , I did n't have any ACTUAL embedded systems programming experience .
So I was honest and explained that while I had n't , I clearly had enough related experience that was easy .
I did n't get the job .
What I should have done was done a bit of reading on the subject to ensure that I know the names of a few embedded processors and bluffed my way through .
The problem was that the head hunter was n't technical enough to understand my explanation , so all he knew to do was check " NO " on the embedded systems experience .
He can comment in there about the chip design , but the HR people he would hand this off to would n't know what do do with it.To summarize , to prepare yourself for working in the IT industry , you have to learn programming , but more importantly , you have to learn how to translate what you know into the language of the nontechnical people who do the hiring .
This requires a kind of intelligence ( subterfuge , to a limited extent ) that many technophiles are not very skilled at .
If you do n't you give away control to the people who understand the art of deception better than they understand technical things .
But those are the ones who rule the world .
Politicians succeed not by knowing things but by knowing how to SPIN things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With respect to actually knowing things and getting work done, it's better to understand computer science concepts in general then to know obscure details of one or a few particular languages.
But keep in mind that the people who hire progammers are not themselves programmers.
Head hunters and HR departments are generally non-technical and will not understand (or care) if you talk about these concepts.
The fact is, unless you're getting a Ph.D., you have to tailor your resume to be consumed by a half-broken computer program with multiple choice check boxes, and that is how you're going to be judged.
It doesn't matter if you know C++, Java, Lisp, Ruby, PHP5, Python, Haskell, and assembly for 10 different processors.
If the job calls for C#, and you don't claim to know it, you won't even be considered.
If you DO claim to know it, it's hit or miss whether or not you'll be tested on it.
I've actually gotten less than perfect scores on C and C++ tests due to things that I KNOW are wrong with the test, so you're up against that too.
As much as you have to know computer science, you also have to know how to game the system.Here's what has worked for me:(1) Know your concepts well.
Know how to take any program and implement it in pseudocode.
Learn how to do it in structured, object oriented, and functional languages.
This will help you actually get the job done and get raises and stuff once you're hired.
(2) Find out what languages are hot and read at least one small tutorial on each, and write programs in each of at least, say, 1000 lines.
Whatever it takes to get used to the basics.
Also, read the wikipedia articles and google for "trick and tips" and "gochas" and other things that people praise or gripe about for those languages.
Get your feet wet.
This way, you can then claim that you have programmed in each of those languages, and you can answer some of the weirder questions someone might ask.
(3) Familiarize yourself with different types programming environments or platforms.
Program something on Windows.
Program something on a Mac (if you can get your hands on one easily enough).
Program something on Linux.
Program something on an embedded system or at least a language used on them.You have to lie judiciously.
For instance, my background included assembly for several processors, C, C++, for modern system as well as things like 6502's, along with a fair amount of chip design experience.
Could I do embedded systems programming?
Duh.  But at this one point, I didn't have any ACTUAL embedded systems programming experience.
So I was honest and explained that while I hadn't, I clearly had enough related experience that was easy.
I didn't get the job.
What I should have done was done a bit of reading on the subject to ensure that I know the names of a few embedded processors and bluffed my way through.
The problem was that the head hunter wasn't technical enough to understand my explanation, so all he knew to do was check "NO" on the embedded systems experience.
He can comment in there about the chip design, but the HR people he would hand this off to wouldn't know what do do with it.To summarize, to prepare yourself for working in the IT industry, you have to learn programming, but more importantly, you have to learn how to translate what you know into the language of the nontechnical people who do the hiring.
This requires a kind of intelligence (subterfuge, to a limited extent) that many technophiles are not very skilled at.
If you don't you give away control to the people who understand the art of deception better than they understand technical things.
But those are the ones who rule the world.
Politicians succeed not by knowing things but by knowing how to SPIN things.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671007</id>
	<title>MULTIPLE languages</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247403780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I look for developers, I will not hire anyone who knows only one programming language, because frankly that's likely evidence that person doesn't know how to -think- about problems in more than one way.  (Sapir-Whorf, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapir-whorf" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapir-whorf</a> [wikipedia.org])</p><p>Languages come and go, we're far away from the 'ultimate language' .  What's important is (a) ability to think about the problem; (b) ability to do good design based on understanding underlying things such as complexity theory/Big O notation/concurrency, etc.; (c) learn and apply the appropriate technology for the problem; (d) ability to write coherently; (e) ability to work within a team; (f) ability to understand and apply methods and techniques to write correct code (I am -not- impressed by debugging skills.  I am impressed by people who treat the debugger as an admission they don't know what their code is doing!); (g) ability to learn on-the-job, including identifying problems and researching/analyzing potential solutions.  Ability to write little programs in some currently popular programming language doesn't make my list.</p><p>I blame both hiring managers/HR departments and academia for reducing much of computer science/software engineering to mere programming-in-the-small vocational training.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I look for developers , I will not hire anyone who knows only one programming language , because frankly that 's likely evidence that person does n't know how to -think- about problems in more than one way .
( Sapir-Whorf , http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapir-whorf [ wikipedia.org ] ) Languages come and go , we 're far away from the 'ultimate language ' .
What 's important is ( a ) ability to think about the problem ; ( b ) ability to do good design based on understanding underlying things such as complexity theory/Big O notation/concurrency , etc .
; ( c ) learn and apply the appropriate technology for the problem ; ( d ) ability to write coherently ; ( e ) ability to work within a team ; ( f ) ability to understand and apply methods and techniques to write correct code ( I am -not- impressed by debugging skills .
I am impressed by people who treat the debugger as an admission they do n't know what their code is doing !
) ; ( g ) ability to learn on-the-job , including identifying problems and researching/analyzing potential solutions .
Ability to write little programs in some currently popular programming language does n't make my list.I blame both hiring managers/HR departments and academia for reducing much of computer science/software engineering to mere programming-in-the-small vocational training .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I look for developers, I will not hire anyone who knows only one programming language, because frankly that's likely evidence that person doesn't know how to -think- about problems in more than one way.
(Sapir-Whorf, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapir-whorf [wikipedia.org])Languages come and go, we're far away from the 'ultimate language' .
What's important is (a) ability to think about the problem; (b) ability to do good design based on understanding underlying things such as complexity theory/Big O notation/concurrency, etc.
; (c) learn and apply the appropriate technology for the problem; (d) ability to write coherently; (e) ability to work within a team; (f) ability to understand and apply methods and techniques to write correct code (I am -not- impressed by debugging skills.
I am impressed by people who treat the debugger as an admission they don't know what their code is doing!
); (g) ability to learn on-the-job, including identifying problems and researching/analyzing potential solutions.
Ability to write little programs in some currently popular programming language doesn't make my list.I blame both hiring managers/HR departments and academia for reducing much of computer science/software engineering to mere programming-in-the-small vocational training.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672243</id>
	<title>Learn Assembly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247415660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And I'm dead serious.   Learn assembly, then learn the various idiologies and practices taught at the second school.    Once you understand assembly, and become attuned to the  oriented design, design patterns, etc..., you will become language and *platform* agnostic(can't stress this one enough), and finally see the Matrix.</p><p>Being a mainly C++ cross-platform developer, how long did it take me to learn J2ME syntax?  Maybe a day?  PHP syntax? A few days?  Software Engineering?  Still working on that one.</p><p>But, at the end of the day, you're just putting 1's and 0's in the right order anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And I 'm dead serious .
Learn assembly , then learn the various idiologies and practices taught at the second school .
Once you understand assembly , and become attuned to the oriented design , design patterns , etc... , you will become language and * platform * agnostic ( ca n't stress this one enough ) , and finally see the Matrix.Being a mainly C + + cross-platform developer , how long did it take me to learn J2ME syntax ?
Maybe a day ?
PHP syntax ?
A few days ?
Software Engineering ?
Still working on that one.But , at the end of the day , you 're just putting 1 's and 0 's in the right order anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I'm dead serious.
Learn assembly, then learn the various idiologies and practices taught at the second school.
Once you understand assembly, and become attuned to the  oriented design, design patterns, etc..., you will become language and *platform* agnostic(can't stress this one enough), and finally see the Matrix.Being a mainly C++ cross-platform developer, how long did it take me to learn J2ME syntax?
Maybe a day?
PHP syntax?
A few days?
Software Engineering?
Still working on that one.But, at the end of the day, you're just putting 1's and 0's in the right order anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669585</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>Guru80</author>
	<datestamp>1247391780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That is the fault of the student however.  No amount of coursework is going to make you master any particular language. Any serious CS student should be programming on their own because they like too and that is what will lead to mastering said language.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That is the fault of the student however .
No amount of coursework is going to make you master any particular language .
Any serious CS student should be programming on their own because they like too and that is what will lead to mastering said language .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is the fault of the student however.
No amount of coursework is going to make you master any particular language.
Any serious CS student should be programming on their own because they like too and that is what will lead to mastering said language.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669493</id>
	<title>No University for you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247391000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Go to a good tech school if you want learn how to use tools.  Go to a university if you want to learn how to think.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Go to a good tech school if you want learn how to use tools .
Go to a university if you want to learn how to think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go to a good tech school if you want learn how to use tools.
Go to a university if you want to learn how to think.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672165</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247415000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bob Dylan's quite good at FORTAN<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I've heard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bob Dylan 's quite good at FORTAN ... I 've heard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bob Dylan's quite good at FORTAN ... I've heard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669515</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>digitalunity</author>
	<datestamp>1247391180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't forget fortran.</p><p>It's still extremely useful if you're doing math in financial and scientific realms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget fortran.It 's still extremely useful if you 're doing math in financial and scientific realms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget fortran.It's still extremely useful if you're doing math in financial and scientific realms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28702271</id>
	<title>where the most money is</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247666100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you want to be a good programmer learn assembly first. You will understand better about what is programming.</p><p>Go to job searching web site. As you will see system programmer makes the most money.(C++ and Java).</p><p>if C++ or java is hard for you then try to learn web languages such as php asp net.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to be a good programmer learn assembly first .
You will understand better about what is programming.Go to job searching web site .
As you will see system programmer makes the most money .
( C + + and Java ) .if C + + or java is hard for you then try to learn web languages such as php asp net .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to be a good programmer learn assembly first.
You will understand better about what is programming.Go to job searching web site.
As you will see system programmer makes the most money.
(C++ and Java).if C++ or java is hard for you then try to learn web languages such as php asp net.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669439</id>
	<title>Any Language in a storm......</title>
	<author>sam i am</author>
	<datestamp>1247390520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>University does *not* teach you to program. Employers know (or should know) this, so don't worry about that.</p><p>My gut feeling is that the more languages you learn, the less you are locked into one way of thinking. The only language that every computer science major needs to learn is assembler. Many Universities do not teach assembler and the students come out with some weird ideas about how computers actually work.</p><p>Most of my work is in C, and my concept of hell is teaching pointers to comp sci students who have only worked in java<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>University does * not * teach you to program .
Employers know ( or should know ) this , so do n't worry about that.My gut feeling is that the more languages you learn , the less you are locked into one way of thinking .
The only language that every computer science major needs to learn is assembler .
Many Universities do not teach assembler and the students come out with some weird ideas about how computers actually work.Most of my work is in C , and my concept of hell is teaching pointers to comp sci students who have only worked in java : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>University does *not* teach you to program.
Employers know (or should know) this, so don't worry about that.My gut feeling is that the more languages you learn, the less you are locked into one way of thinking.
The only language that every computer science major needs to learn is assembler.
Many Universities do not teach assembler and the students come out with some weird ideas about how computers actually work.Most of my work is in C, and my concept of hell is teaching pointers to comp sci students who have only worked in java :(</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673897</id>
	<title>Value the classics</title>
	<author>irober02</author>
	<datestamp>1247482080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I once heard a teacher answer that question, 'Greek or Latin' - a somewhat elliptical response but he went on to explain the way he valued multi-lingualism over mono-lingualism and education over training. I saw his point.

More recently, I've had the opportunity (privilege) to employ student cadets and early career CS graduates. I found that it didn't matter what languages they had experience with but, if they were smart, well-educated and well-motivated, the time it took to become productive in the required language was insignificant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I once heard a teacher answer that question , 'Greek or Latin ' - a somewhat elliptical response but he went on to explain the way he valued multi-lingualism over mono-lingualism and education over training .
I saw his point .
More recently , I 've had the opportunity ( privilege ) to employ student cadets and early career CS graduates .
I found that it did n't matter what languages they had experience with but , if they were smart , well-educated and well-motivated , the time it took to become productive in the required language was insignificant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I once heard a teacher answer that question, 'Greek or Latin' - a somewhat elliptical response but he went on to explain the way he valued multi-lingualism over mono-lingualism and education over training.
I saw his point.
More recently, I've had the opportunity (privilege) to employ student cadets and early career CS graduates.
I found that it didn't matter what languages they had experience with but, if they were smart, well-educated and well-motivated, the time it took to become productive in the required language was insignificant.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670749</id>
	<title>Re:(Python-v-Perl) is the future</title>
	<author>omb</author>
	<datestamp>1247401200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Having written a lot of Perl, from Perl-4, and more recently Python I can tell you that Python is MUCH more understandable than Perl for the COBOL/FORTRAN/PL.1 generation programmers. That is sad but true, and Python is not that bad -v- Perl and is much better understood by oldies.<br><br>Perl and C is where it really is. C++ is an overcomplicated mess as the Myres books ably demonstrate, virtual destructors<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... gur<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br><br>One thing the whole thing makes clear is that no real consensus on either language or methodology.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having written a lot of Perl , from Perl-4 , and more recently Python I can tell you that Python is MUCH more understandable than Perl for the COBOL/FORTRAN/PL.1 generation programmers .
That is sad but true , and Python is not that bad -v- Perl and is much better understood by oldies.Perl and C is where it really is .
C + + is an overcomplicated mess as the Myres books ably demonstrate , virtual destructors ... gur ...One thing the whole thing makes clear is that no real consensus on either language or methodology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having written a lot of Perl, from Perl-4, and more recently Python I can tell you that Python is MUCH more understandable than Perl for the COBOL/FORTRAN/PL.1 generation programmers.
That is sad but true, and Python is not that bad -v- Perl and is much better understood by oldies.Perl and C is where it really is.
C++ is an overcomplicated mess as the Myres books ably demonstrate, virtual destructors ... gur ...One thing the whole thing makes clear is that no real consensus on either language or methodology.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670901</id>
	<title>Re:Go with the way your new school does it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247402880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You don't normally use a screwdriver to hammer in a nail or as a chisel...</p></div><p>Excuse me, have you ever <i>owned</i> a screwdriver?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't normally use a screwdriver to hammer in a nail or as a chisel...Excuse me , have you ever owned a screwdriver ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't normally use a screwdriver to hammer in a nail or as a chisel...Excuse me, have you ever owned a screwdriver?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668957</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670735</id>
	<title>Re:You should be asking a different question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247401080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Learn how to work on a team, <em>work with QA</em>, and learn how to deliver products.</p></div><p>Better yet, learn how to do QA. It's a slightly different mindset that would be helpful when doing your own programming. Instead of looking at a spec and thinking, "How can I make this work?", you look at it and think, "How can I make this break?" The things that make it break is an infinitely larger set than the things that can make it work, so it's very easy to break things unless you actively try to avoid doing it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Learn how to work on a team , work with QA , and learn how to deliver products.Better yet , learn how to do QA .
It 's a slightly different mindset that would be helpful when doing your own programming .
Instead of looking at a spec and thinking , " How can I make this work ?
" , you look at it and think , " How can I make this break ?
" The things that make it break is an infinitely larger set than the things that can make it work , so it 's very easy to break things unless you actively try to avoid doing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Learn how to work on a team, work with QA, and learn how to deliver products.Better yet, learn how to do QA.
It's a slightly different mindset that would be helpful when doing your own programming.
Instead of looking at a spec and thinking, "How can I make this work?
", you look at it and think, "How can I make this break?
" The things that make it break is an infinitely larger set than the things that can make it work, so it's very easy to break things unless you actively try to avoid doing it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669539</id>
	<title>Looking at the New School Languages</title>
	<author>DannyO152</author>
	<datestamp>1247391420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any one else concerned that the new school - unless it is teaching python to really teach about lambda - is ignoring functional programming techniques?</p><p>Unless I'm misunderstanding him, "Oracle" seems pretty vendor/product specific to me as opposed to learning SQL and general concepts in database administration.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any one else concerned that the new school - unless it is teaching python to really teach about lambda - is ignoring functional programming techniques ? Unless I 'm misunderstanding him , " Oracle " seems pretty vendor/product specific to me as opposed to learning SQL and general concepts in database administration .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any one else concerned that the new school - unless it is teaching python to really teach about lambda - is ignoring functional programming techniques?Unless I'm misunderstanding him, "Oracle" seems pretty vendor/product specific to me as opposed to learning SQL and general concepts in database administration.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670859</id>
	<title>Re:Find another major</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247402580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>nobody in law is smart</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>nobody in law is smart</tokentext>
<sentencetext>nobody in law is smart</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669635</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672175</id>
	<title>how to learn CS</title>
	<author>rock\_climbing\_guy</author>
	<datestamp>1247415060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My professor back in the day said, "Most computer science professors will teach you a programming language.  A good professor will teach you to program."  Looking back, he sure taught me to program; to him, the language he used to teach was irrelevant.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My professor back in the day said , " Most computer science professors will teach you a programming language .
A good professor will teach you to program .
" Looking back , he sure taught me to program ; to him , the language he used to teach was irrelevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My professor back in the day said, "Most computer science professors will teach you a programming language.
A good professor will teach you to program.
"  Looking back, he sure taught me to program; to him, the language he used to teach was irrelevant.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881</id>
	<title>Your school is right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247428800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A CS degree is not about making you a monkey that can program only one language. It is about learning how to think. The multi-language approach will ensure that you are exposed to many ways of representation.
</p><p>The "real" world will train you how to be a monkey well enough.
</p><p>If knowing one language well enough to get a job, a certification in Java, C# or whatever will serve your simian side better. Use the knowledge in the diversity in languages to tell potential employer that you can quickly learn to program in whatever environment is required.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A CS degree is not about making you a monkey that can program only one language .
It is about learning how to think .
The multi-language approach will ensure that you are exposed to many ways of representation .
The " real " world will train you how to be a monkey well enough .
If knowing one language well enough to get a job , a certification in Java , C # or whatever will serve your simian side better .
Use the knowledge in the diversity in languages to tell potential employer that you can quickly learn to program in whatever environment is required .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A CS degree is not about making you a monkey that can program only one language.
It is about learning how to think.
The multi-language approach will ensure that you are exposed to many ways of representation.
The "real" world will train you how to be a monkey well enough.
If knowing one language well enough to get a job, a certification in Java, C# or whatever will serve your simian side better.
Use the knowledge in the diversity in languages to tell potential employer that you can quickly learn to program in whatever environment is required.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28686519</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong Focus</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1247505900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>- Stop teaching languages and start teaching algorithms, techniques, and the 'engineering' part of software engineering. At the end of the day it doesn't matter how many languages you know if you can't use any of them in real-world team-based programming of large and complicated projects. You also get into the more specialized areas you are interested in such as graphics, AI, computational analysis, etc.</i></p><p>At this point the CS student is invariably going to be picking up new languages that excel in each of these fields.  That's good.</p><p><i>In short: a decent program[er] should be able to sit down and pick up an unfamiliar language without too much trouble, so I wouldn't worry too much about what language you learn first. What's important is that you lean to program well -- after that the language just doesn't matter that much.</i></p><p>The first language I learned was pretty tough.  So was the second.  The third came easier.  The fourth seemed like reading a new chapter in a book, and the rest were very practical ("OK, how do I do X in this language?").  It's by learning languages that one starts to see the commonality (and uniqueness) among them, and becomes better at each of them.  Certainly after learning my fifth language, I was better at the first one I'd learned (OK, that's a lie, nobody needed VIC-20 assembly anymore, but the concept stands).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>- Stop teaching languages and start teaching algorithms , techniques , and the 'engineering ' part of software engineering .
At the end of the day it does n't matter how many languages you know if you ca n't use any of them in real-world team-based programming of large and complicated projects .
You also get into the more specialized areas you are interested in such as graphics , AI , computational analysis , etc.At this point the CS student is invariably going to be picking up new languages that excel in each of these fields .
That 's good.In short : a decent program [ er ] should be able to sit down and pick up an unfamiliar language without too much trouble , so I would n't worry too much about what language you learn first .
What 's important is that you lean to program well -- after that the language just does n't matter that much.The first language I learned was pretty tough .
So was the second .
The third came easier .
The fourth seemed like reading a new chapter in a book , and the rest were very practical ( " OK , how do I do X in this language ? " ) .
It 's by learning languages that one starts to see the commonality ( and uniqueness ) among them , and becomes better at each of them .
Certainly after learning my fifth language , I was better at the first one I 'd learned ( OK , that 's a lie , nobody needed VIC-20 assembly anymore , but the concept stands ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- Stop teaching languages and start teaching algorithms, techniques, and the 'engineering' part of software engineering.
At the end of the day it doesn't matter how many languages you know if you can't use any of them in real-world team-based programming of large and complicated projects.
You also get into the more specialized areas you are interested in such as graphics, AI, computational analysis, etc.At this point the CS student is invariably going to be picking up new languages that excel in each of these fields.
That's good.In short: a decent program[er] should be able to sit down and pick up an unfamiliar language without too much trouble, so I wouldn't worry too much about what language you learn first.
What's important is that you lean to program well -- after that the language just doesn't matter that much.The first language I learned was pretty tough.
So was the second.
The third came easier.
The fourth seemed like reading a new chapter in a book, and the rest were very practical ("OK, how do I do X in this language?").
It's by learning languages that one starts to see the commonality (and uniqueness) among them, and becomes better at each of them.
Certainly after learning my fifth language, I was better at the first one I'd learned (OK, that's a lie, nobody needed VIC-20 assembly anymore, but the concept stands).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670429</id>
	<title>You need to be fluent in at least one language</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247398320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having worked as a software engineer for 20 years and taught computer science at the college level for 8, I cannot stress enough that you need to become fluent in at least one language. It is great to know a bit about a bunch of them, but if interviewed many programmers and had many students show up in class unable to actually write a program in some language. They know a smattering of 5 languages, but can't code off the top of their head in any of them.</p><p>So... feel free to expose yourself to many languages, but make sure you are an expert in at least one, or you won't pass my class, and I wouldn't hire you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having worked as a software engineer for 20 years and taught computer science at the college level for 8 , I can not stress enough that you need to become fluent in at least one language .
It is great to know a bit about a bunch of them , but if interviewed many programmers and had many students show up in class unable to actually write a program in some language .
They know a smattering of 5 languages , but ca n't code off the top of their head in any of them.So... feel free to expose yourself to many languages , but make sure you are an expert in at least one , or you wo n't pass my class , and I would n't hire you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having worked as a software engineer for 20 years and taught computer science at the college level for 8, I cannot stress enough that you need to become fluent in at least one language.
It is great to know a bit about a bunch of them, but if interviewed many programmers and had many students show up in class unable to actually write a program in some language.
They know a smattering of 5 languages, but can't code off the top of their head in any of them.So... feel free to expose yourself to many languages, but make sure you are an expert in at least one, or you won't pass my class, and I wouldn't hire you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670499</id>
	<title>Don't Panic!</title>
	<author>strangedays</author>
	<datestamp>1247398980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The answer is 54, you just have to know that reads as 42 in base 13.
<br>
The discussion in our small software ecosystem about skills and capabilities gets similarly confused.
All the marketing, sales and head hunters have no deep understanding about the business of software.
In their ignorance, they believe that they don't need to understand us;  they are wrong.
They are parasites, not symbionts.
<br>
To all of them, people like me are an inconvenient truth, an irritating oxymoron, because... I specialize in being a generalist.
I dont fit into their curricula, or populations, or territories, or verticals, or skillsets, or .
So screw them!,  Their opinions, though much publicized, do not matter.
<br>
You will see irritating jobs and career adverts that list required skills in excruciating detail, often impossibly so.
You may be interviewed by idiots who ask for 5 years expereince in a 3 year old Tech, just ignore all that crap.
<br>
I believe that building software should always be fun and practical
Any software woth developing, has never been built before, it's complex and hard, but you must think it worthwhile, worth the effort; that's kinda the point.
<br>
I am just a happy SOB that got into this business to build real and useful systems for real and useful people.  No BS, I figured I would usually get paid that way, for once I was mostly right.
<br>
Whatever your reasons may be, I suggest pursuing whatever is interesting and fun and practical.  Learn the original meaning of "Hacker", before it was corrupted by the lazy media to be a synonym for "Cracker"
<br>
Find the edge, the too hard stuff, the useful stuff, the stuff people really need, the stuff that nobody has done, yet.  Then build it, using whatever tools and languages you may need.  <br>Learn how to learn whatever you need to know.
<br>For me...  Expertise in particular things... was, and is, a random side effect of the effort to create something useful.
<br>Some people call it experience, mostly I call it irrelevant, or history.
<br>
You asked a great question, and surprisingly your school seems to doing the right thing.
<br>Kudos.<br>
Enjoy the ride, and welcome to the real world.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The answer is 54 , you just have to know that reads as 42 in base 13 .
The discussion in our small software ecosystem about skills and capabilities gets similarly confused .
All the marketing , sales and head hunters have no deep understanding about the business of software .
In their ignorance , they believe that they do n't need to understand us ; they are wrong .
They are parasites , not symbionts .
To all of them , people like me are an inconvenient truth , an irritating oxymoron , because... I specialize in being a generalist .
I dont fit into their curricula , or populations , or territories , or verticals , or skillsets , or .
So screw them ! , Their opinions , though much publicized , do not matter .
You will see irritating jobs and career adverts that list required skills in excruciating detail , often impossibly so .
You may be interviewed by idiots who ask for 5 years expereince in a 3 year old Tech , just ignore all that crap .
I believe that building software should always be fun and practical Any software woth developing , has never been built before , it 's complex and hard , but you must think it worthwhile , worth the effort ; that 's kinda the point .
I am just a happy SOB that got into this business to build real and useful systems for real and useful people .
No BS , I figured I would usually get paid that way , for once I was mostly right .
Whatever your reasons may be , I suggest pursuing whatever is interesting and fun and practical .
Learn the original meaning of " Hacker " , before it was corrupted by the lazy media to be a synonym for " Cracker " Find the edge , the too hard stuff , the useful stuff , the stuff people really need , the stuff that nobody has done , yet .
Then build it , using whatever tools and languages you may need .
Learn how to learn whatever you need to know .
For me... Expertise in particular things... was , and is , a random side effect of the effort to create something useful .
Some people call it experience , mostly I call it irrelevant , or history .
You asked a great question , and surprisingly your school seems to doing the right thing .
Kudos . Enjoy the ride , and welcome to the real world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The answer is 54, you just have to know that reads as 42 in base 13.
The discussion in our small software ecosystem about skills and capabilities gets similarly confused.
All the marketing, sales and head hunters have no deep understanding about the business of software.
In their ignorance, they believe that they don't need to understand us;  they are wrong.
They are parasites, not symbionts.
To all of them, people like me are an inconvenient truth, an irritating oxymoron, because... I specialize in being a generalist.
I dont fit into their curricula, or populations, or territories, or verticals, or skillsets, or .
So screw them!,  Their opinions, though much publicized, do not matter.
You will see irritating jobs and career adverts that list required skills in excruciating detail, often impossibly so.
You may be interviewed by idiots who ask for 5 years expereince in a 3 year old Tech, just ignore all that crap.
I believe that building software should always be fun and practical
Any software woth developing, has never been built before, it's complex and hard, but you must think it worthwhile, worth the effort; that's kinda the point.
I am just a happy SOB that got into this business to build real and useful systems for real and useful people.
No BS, I figured I would usually get paid that way, for once I was mostly right.
Whatever your reasons may be, I suggest pursuing whatever is interesting and fun and practical.
Learn the original meaning of "Hacker", before it was corrupted by the lazy media to be a synonym for "Cracker"

Find the edge, the too hard stuff, the useful stuff, the stuff people really need, the stuff that nobody has done, yet.
Then build it, using whatever tools and languages you may need.
Learn how to learn whatever you need to know.
For me...  Expertise in particular things... was, and is, a random side effect of the effort to create something useful.
Some people call it experience, mostly I call it irrelevant, or history.
You asked a great question, and surprisingly your school seems to doing the right thing.
Kudos.
Enjoy the ride, and welcome to the real world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>pyite</author>
	<datestamp>1247391840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>but I also think it's important for a graduate of a 4-year CS degree to be an expert in at least one.</i></p><p>I've used this quote time and time again on here, and I'll use it again:  <i>"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes."</i> -- Edsger W. Dijkstra.</p><p>And this one is completely appropriate to, as to why Knuth uses MIX/MMIX in his books and not some other language. The same thing applies exactly to a university program of computer science:</p><p><i>"Moreover, if I did use a high-level language, what language should it be? In the 1960s I would probably have chosen Algol W; in the 1970s, I would then have had to rewrite my books using Pascal; in the 1980s, I would surely have changed everything to C; in the 1990s, I would have had to switch to C++ and then probably to Java. In the 2000s, yet another language will no doubt be de rigueur. I cannot afford the time to rewrite my books as languages go in and out of fashion; languages aren't the point of my books, the point is rather what you can do in your favorite language. My books focus on timeless truths."</i></p><p>Being in expert in one programming language is fine if you just want to be a programmer. If you want to be a computer scientist, it's neither necessary nor sufficient.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but I also think it 's important for a graduate of a 4-year CS degree to be an expert in at least one.I 've used this quote time and time again on here , and I 'll use it again : " Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes .
" -- Edsger W. Dijkstra.And this one is completely appropriate to , as to why Knuth uses MIX/MMIX in his books and not some other language .
The same thing applies exactly to a university program of computer science : " Moreover , if I did use a high-level language , what language should it be ?
In the 1960s I would probably have chosen Algol W ; in the 1970s , I would then have had to rewrite my books using Pascal ; in the 1980s , I would surely have changed everything to C ; in the 1990s , I would have had to switch to C + + and then probably to Java .
In the 2000s , yet another language will no doubt be de rigueur .
I can not afford the time to rewrite my books as languages go in and out of fashion ; languages are n't the point of my books , the point is rather what you can do in your favorite language .
My books focus on timeless truths .
" Being in expert in one programming language is fine if you just want to be a programmer .
If you want to be a computer scientist , it 's neither necessary nor sufficient .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but I also think it's important for a graduate of a 4-year CS degree to be an expert in at least one.I've used this quote time and time again on here, and I'll use it again:  "Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.
" -- Edsger W. Dijkstra.And this one is completely appropriate to, as to why Knuth uses MIX/MMIX in his books and not some other language.
The same thing applies exactly to a university program of computer science:"Moreover, if I did use a high-level language, what language should it be?
In the 1960s I would probably have chosen Algol W; in the 1970s, I would then have had to rewrite my books using Pascal; in the 1980s, I would surely have changed everything to C; in the 1990s, I would have had to switch to C++ and then probably to Java.
In the 2000s, yet another language will no doubt be de rigueur.
I cannot afford the time to rewrite my books as languages go in and out of fashion; languages aren't the point of my books, the point is rather what you can do in your favorite language.
My books focus on timeless truths.
"Being in expert in one programming language is fine if you just want to be a programmer.
If you want to be a computer scientist, it's neither necessary nor sufficient.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669163</id>
	<title>3 Languages are a good start</title>
	<author>wiredlogic</author>
	<datestamp>1247431080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think a CS major today should be conversant in at least three languages by the time of graduation. At a minimum you should have knowledge of an assembly language to better understand how a microprocessor really works, a monolithic scripting language like Python or Perl, and a systems language like C, C++, or Java. From there it becomes easy to add on what you need as you need it because you begin to recognize toe commonality in how things are done between different languages so you just have to absorb the new syntax for the most part.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think a CS major today should be conversant in at least three languages by the time of graduation .
At a minimum you should have knowledge of an assembly language to better understand how a microprocessor really works , a monolithic scripting language like Python or Perl , and a systems language like C , C + + , or Java .
From there it becomes easy to add on what you need as you need it because you begin to recognize toe commonality in how things are done between different languages so you just have to absorb the new syntax for the most part .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think a CS major today should be conversant in at least three languages by the time of graduation.
At a minimum you should have knowledge of an assembly language to better understand how a microprocessor really works, a monolithic scripting language like Python or Perl, and a systems language like C, C++, or Java.
From there it becomes easy to add on what you need as you need it because you begin to recognize toe commonality in how things are done between different languages so you just have to absorb the new syntax for the most part.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670097</id>
	<title>Computer Science and Computer Programming</title>
	<author>mazinger</author>
	<datestamp>1247395320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Computer science is not computer programming, but computer programming is a tool of computer science.

Computer science gives you the training to determine if a problem is "computable".  Computer programming is the tool.  With a good computer science background, you should be able to pick up new things quickly and learn how to deal with problems that require a computation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Computer science is not computer programming , but computer programming is a tool of computer science .
Computer science gives you the training to determine if a problem is " computable " .
Computer programming is the tool .
With a good computer science background , you should be able to pick up new things quickly and learn how to deal with problems that require a computation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Computer science is not computer programming, but computer programming is a tool of computer science.
Computer science gives you the training to determine if a problem is "computable".
Computer programming is the tool.
With a good computer science background, you should be able to pick up new things quickly and learn how to deal with problems that require a computation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674045</id>
	<title>Broad approach</title>
	<author>mirabilos</author>
	<datestamp>1247484300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The latter approach is the better one in the long term.</p><p>You are expected to learn any programming language to actually use<br>by yourself. The university gives you the basics, a broad overview,<br>and the tools you need to learn these.</p><p>It is also a common mis-conception that you&#226;(TM)ll be employed immediately<br>after finishing university. No, really not. University does not prepare<br>for the workplace. You need more real-life experience than that, which<br>is why universities (don&#226;(TM)t know about America, but over here they do)<br>require at least one internship be passed before the diploma can be<br>achieved. You will learn real-life work skills there, and (in case of<br>a programming job) get real-life programming experience, which is dif-<br>ferent from merely learning a programming language.</p><p>Trust me if I say that, with some shell languages such as mksh, you<br>can both \_script\_ and \_program\_ in shell, such huge is the difference.<br>Most never see the latter niveau.</p><p>I&#226;(TM)d suggest you use the university time to \_really\_ get to know the<br>basics of as many languages as you can &#226;" including functional and<br>other &#226;oeweird&#226; languages. Gwydion Dylan, Haskell, LISP, you name it.<br>Then, do your assignments in various languages for play; you&#226;(TM)ll find<br>out which ones you like/dislike and which ones are better/worse suited<br>for the task at hand. Bonus points (to you only) if you do some of the<br>assignments in two languages (probably using *different* algorithms &#226;"<br>tailor the algorithm to the language used, not to the theory related<br>to the assignment, as academics want to make you).</p><p>Note I know both the academic world and that of &#226;oecraftmanship&#226;, I&#226;(TM)ve<br>seen both sides.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The latter approach is the better one in the long term.You are expected to learn any programming language to actually useby yourself .
The university gives you the basics , a broad overview,and the tools you need to learn these.It is also a common mis-conception that you   ( TM ) ll be employed immediatelyafter finishing university .
No , really not .
University does not preparefor the workplace .
You need more real-life experience than that , whichis why universities ( don   ( TM ) t know about America , but over here they do ) require at least one internship be passed before the diploma can beachieved .
You will learn real-life work skills there , and ( in case ofa programming job ) get real-life programming experience , which is dif-ferent from merely learning a programming language.Trust me if I say that , with some shell languages such as mksh , youcan both \ _script \ _ and \ _program \ _ in shell , such huge is the difference.Most never see the latter niveau.I   ( TM ) d suggest you use the university time to \ _really \ _ get to know thebasics of as many languages as you can   " including functional andother   oeweird   languages .
Gwydion Dylan , Haskell , LISP , you name it.Then , do your assignments in various languages for play ; you   ( TM ) ll findout which ones you like/dislike and which ones are better/worse suitedfor the task at hand .
Bonus points ( to you only ) if you do some of theassignments in two languages ( probably using * different * algorithms   " tailor the algorithm to the language used , not to the theory relatedto the assignment , as academics want to make you ) .Note I know both the academic world and that of   oecraftmanship   , I   ( TM ) veseen both sides .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The latter approach is the better one in the long term.You are expected to learn any programming language to actually useby yourself.
The university gives you the basics, a broad overview,and the tools you need to learn these.It is also a common mis-conception that youâ(TM)ll be employed immediatelyafter finishing university.
No, really not.
University does not preparefor the workplace.
You need more real-life experience than that, whichis why universities (donâ(TM)t know about America, but over here they do)require at least one internship be passed before the diploma can beachieved.
You will learn real-life work skills there, and (in case ofa programming job) get real-life programming experience, which is dif-ferent from merely learning a programming language.Trust me if I say that, with some shell languages such as mksh, youcan both \_script\_ and \_program\_ in shell, such huge is the difference.Most never see the latter niveau.Iâ(TM)d suggest you use the university time to \_really\_ get to know thebasics of as many languages as you can â" including functional andother âoeweirdâ languages.
Gwydion Dylan, Haskell, LISP, you name it.Then, do your assignments in various languages for play; youâ(TM)ll findout which ones you like/dislike and which ones are better/worse suitedfor the task at hand.
Bonus points (to you only) if you do some of theassignments in two languages (probably using *different* algorithms â"tailor the algorithm to the language used, not to the theory relatedto the assignment, as academics want to make you).Note I know both the academic world and that of âoecraftmanshipâ, Iâ(TM)veseen both sides.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669105</id>
	<title>Wrong Major</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247430600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If after a year or more of college, you think OpenGL and Oracle are programming languages, maybe CS isn't the right major for you.</p><p>As others have suggested, try a trade school or community college. They will be happy to teach you to be a single language code monkey, without bogging you down with complicated high-level concepts like "what is a programming language?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If after a year or more of college , you think OpenGL and Oracle are programming languages , maybe CS is n't the right major for you.As others have suggested , try a trade school or community college .
They will be happy to teach you to be a single language code monkey , without bogging you down with complicated high-level concepts like " what is a programming language ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If after a year or more of college, you think OpenGL and Oracle are programming languages, maybe CS isn't the right major for you.As others have suggested, try a trade school or community college.
They will be happy to teach you to be a single language code monkey, without bogging you down with complicated high-level concepts like "what is a programming language?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668891</id>
	<title>Does it really matter?</title>
	<author>VincenzoRomano</author>
	<datestamp>1247428920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Find a serious computer science course.<br>The choosing among languages will be more a matter of taste than of actual contents.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Find a serious computer science course.The choosing among languages will be more a matter of taste than of actual contents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Find a serious computer science course.The choosing among languages will be more a matter of taste than of actual contents.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669469</id>
	<title>Re:Go with the way your new school does it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247390820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm going to be mean here but this is true.<br>If I want to hire someone who can solve problems I'm not going to hire a CS major.<br>I'll go for a physics or engineering major first who has shown he has the ability to code.<br>In my experience the kids who couldn't hack the more rigorous studies transferred into CS.<br>Or they're the kids who liked to "play" with computers but don't understand that they're just usable as a tool.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm going to be mean here but this is true.If I want to hire someone who can solve problems I 'm not going to hire a CS major.I 'll go for a physics or engineering major first who has shown he has the ability to code.In my experience the kids who could n't hack the more rigorous studies transferred into CS.Or they 're the kids who liked to " play " with computers but do n't understand that they 're just usable as a tool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm going to be mean here but this is true.If I want to hire someone who can solve problems I'm not going to hire a CS major.I'll go for a physics or engineering major first who has shown he has the ability to code.In my experience the kids who couldn't hack the more rigorous studies transferred into CS.Or they're the kids who liked to "play" with computers but don't understand that they're just usable as a tool.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668957</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673757</id>
	<title>What kind of stuff would you like the program?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247480160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you are doing crypto and coding libraries, then probably just C.  If you are doing web, then php might be good to learn.  I personally find that for most of my uses, python wins out.  But I think if you are going to do anything unixy, then you need to know Bash; especially on Linux.</p><p>Bash<br>C<br>Python<br>Php<br>SQL</p><p>That gets me by 98\% of all things..  I don't do Java because anything lower level should be C, anything higher level should be Python.  But that's just my opinion YMMV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are doing crypto and coding libraries , then probably just C. If you are doing web , then php might be good to learn .
I personally find that for most of my uses , python wins out .
But I think if you are going to do anything unixy , then you need to know Bash ; especially on Linux.BashCPythonPhpSQLThat gets me by 98 \ % of all things.. I do n't do Java because anything lower level should be C , anything higher level should be Python .
But that 's just my opinion YMMV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are doing crypto and coding libraries, then probably just C.  If you are doing web, then php might be good to learn.
I personally find that for most of my uses, python wins out.
But I think if you are going to do anything unixy, then you need to know Bash; especially on Linux.BashCPythonPhpSQLThat gets me by 98\% of all things..  I don't do Java because anything lower level should be C, anything higher level should be Python.
But that's just my opinion YMMV.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28680581</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>BradleyAndersen</author>
	<datestamp>1247514240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><em>A pilot will probably never have to safely ditch an airliner in the ocean at any point in their career. But there's no way in hell that I'm hiring one that doesn't know how to do it.</em>
<br> <br>
Hear, hear! That's all you needed to say, brother.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A pilot will probably never have to safely ditch an airliner in the ocean at any point in their career .
But there 's no way in hell that I 'm hiring one that does n't know how to do it .
Hear , hear !
That 's all you needed to say , brother .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A pilot will probably never have to safely ditch an airliner in the ocean at any point in their career.
But there's no way in hell that I'm hiring one that doesn't know how to do it.
Hear, hear!
That's all you needed to say, brother.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28708113</id>
	<title>Re:Too dumb to realize new school is better</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247651400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ehack, did you know that a common perception of Millennial tech workers is that they are untrainable?</p><p>I say it's true and GOOD that Millennials can't be trained to act like stupid-ass selfish ignoramus Baby Boomers or morose, hostile, apathetic Gen-Xers. And I am speaking as one of the latter.</p><p>Let the kid complain, AND let the kid show the instructor how to do it better. The tech industry in still an infant. The Millennials are more in tune with its heartbeat and what it means to be involved with ubiquitous technology than older generations. They are also the customers and developers of the near future. So stop being a curmudgeon, or you'll end up a bitter, defeated curmudgeon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ehack , did you know that a common perception of Millennial tech workers is that they are untrainable ? I say it 's true and GOOD that Millennials ca n't be trained to act like stupid-ass selfish ignoramus Baby Boomers or morose , hostile , apathetic Gen-Xers .
And I am speaking as one of the latter.Let the kid complain , AND let the kid show the instructor how to do it better .
The tech industry in still an infant .
The Millennials are more in tune with its heartbeat and what it means to be involved with ubiquitous technology than older generations .
They are also the customers and developers of the near future .
So stop being a curmudgeon , or you 'll end up a bitter , defeated curmudgeon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ehack, did you know that a common perception of Millennial tech workers is that they are untrainable?I say it's true and GOOD that Millennials can't be trained to act like stupid-ass selfish ignoramus Baby Boomers or morose, hostile, apathetic Gen-Xers.
And I am speaking as one of the latter.Let the kid complain, AND let the kid show the instructor how to do it better.
The tech industry in still an infant.
The Millennials are more in tune with its heartbeat and what it means to be involved with ubiquitous technology than older generations.
They are also the customers and developers of the near future.
So stop being a curmudgeon, or you'll end up a bitter, defeated curmudgeon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28691095</id>
	<title>Summer internship and other thoughts</title>
	<author>eabell</author>
	<datestamp>1247586480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you want experience, then you want something like a summer internship. Lots of companies hire college students for 10-12 weeks over the summer. You'll get a little bit of experience, and you'll get better pay than working at Starbucks.</p><p>Or you can work part-time during the school year. I did a part-time job 20 hours a week at a local research institute affiliated with the college I went to as an undergrad. It was nice enough pay to get some spending money on top of paying for the basics, and I got a lot of useful experience.</p><p>There's also open source experience, but I know nothing about that personally.</p><p>If you wanted to focus on a language, I suppose you could look into various certifications, like Sun Java certifications. Those cost money. The type of hiring we do, we don't care about those (we're a research institute, we want to see advanced degrees) but some others might have an idea if they're actually worth anything in the programming field. I'm skeptical, but maybe it's useful for a new grad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want experience , then you want something like a summer internship .
Lots of companies hire college students for 10-12 weeks over the summer .
You 'll get a little bit of experience , and you 'll get better pay than working at Starbucks.Or you can work part-time during the school year .
I did a part-time job 20 hours a week at a local research institute affiliated with the college I went to as an undergrad .
It was nice enough pay to get some spending money on top of paying for the basics , and I got a lot of useful experience.There 's also open source experience , but I know nothing about that personally.If you wanted to focus on a language , I suppose you could look into various certifications , like Sun Java certifications .
Those cost money .
The type of hiring we do , we do n't care about those ( we 're a research institute , we want to see advanced degrees ) but some others might have an idea if they 're actually worth anything in the programming field .
I 'm skeptical , but maybe it 's useful for a new grad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want experience, then you want something like a summer internship.
Lots of companies hire college students for 10-12 weeks over the summer.
You'll get a little bit of experience, and you'll get better pay than working at Starbucks.Or you can work part-time during the school year.
I did a part-time job 20 hours a week at a local research institute affiliated with the college I went to as an undergrad.
It was nice enough pay to get some spending money on top of paying for the basics, and I got a lot of useful experience.There's also open source experience, but I know nothing about that personally.If you wanted to focus on a language, I suppose you could look into various certifications, like Sun Java certifications.
Those cost money.
The type of hiring we do, we don't care about those (we're a research institute, we want to see advanced degrees) but some others might have an idea if they're actually worth anything in the programming field.
I'm skeptical, but maybe it's useful for a new grad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671285</id>
	<title>English</title>
	<author>flyingfsck</author>
	<datestamp>1247406600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Of all the programming languages, English will serve you best, followed by Marketing Speak.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of all the programming languages , English will serve you best , followed by Marketing Speak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of all the programming languages, English will serve you best, followed by Marketing Speak.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669129</id>
	<title>It doesn't matter much</title>
	<author>symbolset</author>
	<datestamp>1247430780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If after a while you haven't discovered that all languages are essentially the same you should find another career path.  But don't program in COBOL if you can avoid it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If after a while you have n't discovered that all languages are essentially the same you should find another career path .
But do n't program in COBOL if you can avoid it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If after a while you haven't discovered that all languages are essentially the same you should find another career path.
But don't program in COBOL if you can avoid it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677851</id>
	<title>Re:Languages don't matter...  except PHP</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1247505240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I make the hiring decisions at my company. I check to see if people can solve complex problems. I don't care what language you know. You can learn PHP in a couple of hours.</p></div><p>Sadly, it takes much, much longer to unlearn it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I make the hiring decisions at my company .
I check to see if people can solve complex problems .
I do n't care what language you know .
You can learn PHP in a couple of hours.Sadly , it takes much , much longer to unlearn it .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I make the hiring decisions at my company.
I check to see if people can solve complex problems.
I don't care what language you know.
You can learn PHP in a couple of hours.Sadly, it takes much, much longer to unlearn it.
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669031</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670187</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe you're the wrong place</title>
	<author>asc99c</author>
	<datestamp>1247395980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I strongly agree with this.  I only learnt Java at university, but there was I think enough theory that most of what I was taught was usable in languages I'd never looked at before.  Which was fortunate since on leaving university, I immediately found myself programming in Pascal on OpenVMS, followed by C/Unix.</p><p>The only problems I came across switching languages is the standard libraries with different languages.  Particularly Java and C# have huge standard libraries.  However, I've often found that I'm just not good at remembering these libraries and what I try to do is remember the sorts of ways things work instead of exact function names and class heirarchies.  When I'm writing a Java GUI application, I'll have the Java API docs open permanently, and the same in C#.  Although I know the Java APIs pretty well, I find I can code most things in C# around 90\% of the speed without knowing the libraries - generally googling for a java class name plus C# will point me in the right direction if I ever get lost.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I strongly agree with this .
I only learnt Java at university , but there was I think enough theory that most of what I was taught was usable in languages I 'd never looked at before .
Which was fortunate since on leaving university , I immediately found myself programming in Pascal on OpenVMS , followed by C/Unix.The only problems I came across switching languages is the standard libraries with different languages .
Particularly Java and C # have huge standard libraries .
However , I 've often found that I 'm just not good at remembering these libraries and what I try to do is remember the sorts of ways things work instead of exact function names and class heirarchies .
When I 'm writing a Java GUI application , I 'll have the Java API docs open permanently , and the same in C # .
Although I know the Java APIs pretty well , I find I can code most things in C # around 90 \ % of the speed without knowing the libraries - generally googling for a java class name plus C # will point me in the right direction if I ever get lost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I strongly agree with this.
I only learnt Java at university, but there was I think enough theory that most of what I was taught was usable in languages I'd never looked at before.
Which was fortunate since on leaving university, I immediately found myself programming in Pascal on OpenVMS, followed by C/Unix.The only problems I came across switching languages is the standard libraries with different languages.
Particularly Java and C# have huge standard libraries.
However, I've often found that I'm just not good at remembering these libraries and what I try to do is remember the sorts of ways things work instead of exact function names and class heirarchies.
When I'm writing a Java GUI application, I'll have the Java API docs open permanently, and the same in C#.
Although I know the Java APIs pretty well, I find I can code most things in C# around 90\% of the speed without knowing the libraries - generally googling for a java class name plus C# will point me in the right direction if I ever get lost.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669727</id>
	<title>Re:Go to a "trade school" for that. Not a universi</title>
	<author>Dragonslicer</author>
	<datestamp>1247392740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes."</p></div><p>How many astronomers don't know how to use a telescope?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes .
" How many astronomers do n't know how to use a telescope ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.
"How many astronomers don't know how to use a telescope?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670515</id>
	<title>Good question.</title>
	<author>Denihil</author>
	<datestamp>1247399160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I asked the exact same thing as the editor did back when i was in high school in my AP computer programming course. The teacher of mine (who also taught nothing but c++ as his taught launguage) told me that computer languages are emerging constantly, and a solid advanced understanding of one will not only help you in your resume process, but will also show that you have the fortitude necessary to segue into other languages. So, tl;dr (or at least what i got out of the whole question) was to learn a single language hardcore, then maybe spend a few nights with a couple others to learn the differences. Ah well though, i'm unemployed at the moment though, so take what i say with a grain of salt. Heh.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I asked the exact same thing as the editor did back when i was in high school in my AP computer programming course .
The teacher of mine ( who also taught nothing but c + + as his taught launguage ) told me that computer languages are emerging constantly , and a solid advanced understanding of one will not only help you in your resume process , but will also show that you have the fortitude necessary to segue into other languages .
So , tl ; dr ( or at least what i got out of the whole question ) was to learn a single language hardcore , then maybe spend a few nights with a couple others to learn the differences .
Ah well though , i 'm unemployed at the moment though , so take what i say with a grain of salt .
Heh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I asked the exact same thing as the editor did back when i was in high school in my AP computer programming course.
The teacher of mine (who also taught nothing but c++ as his taught launguage) told me that computer languages are emerging constantly, and a solid advanced understanding of one will not only help you in your resume process, but will also show that you have the fortitude necessary to segue into other languages.
So, tl;dr (or at least what i got out of the whole question) was to learn a single language hardcore, then maybe spend a few nights with a couple others to learn the differences.
Ah well though, i'm unemployed at the moment though, so take what i say with a grain of salt.
Heh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675179</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247495040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Do you actually know of a good computer scientist who can't program?</p></div><p>Go to CMU and become a grad student.  We do all their work for them, anyway.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you actually know of a good computer scientist who ca n't program ? Go to CMU and become a grad student .
We do all their work for them , anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you actually know of a good computer scientist who can't program?Go to CMU and become a grad student.
We do all their work for them, anyway.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671133</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669635</id>
	<title>Re:Find another major</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1247392020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
<i>Take it from me, a computer science degree definitely won't help you get a job.</i>
</p><p>
He may be right.  Which is sad.
</p><p>
I'm not complaining personally.  I've been fortunate enough to do plenty of good computer science over the course of a long career.  I've done everything from networking theory to proof of correctness to autonomous robots.  I've done web stuff, too, and today write mostly Python, so I'm not stuck in the past.
</p><p>
But new graduates, especially if they only have a BS, are going to have trouble finding a good career.  Most of the basic problems in the field have been solved, and the ones that remain require deep specialization before you can make progress.  The previous poster is right; employers want a bunch of buzzwords, because much of programming at the working levels today is knowing how to interface with a huge collection of ever-changing APIs, and those take time to learn.
</p><p>
A century ago, the stationary engineers who set up factories to run on electricity and steam had the same problem.  In 1870, that was cutting-edge technology.  By 1910, factory owners just ordered motors and hooked them up.  Today, it's a union job.
</p><p>
There are good computer science problems to work on today, but it's hard to find a job that needs them solved.  There's great stuff going on in machine learning.  Game AIs could get much better.  Robotics is finally starting to work.  Computer vision is getting very good. There's a whole world of interesting technology associated with semiconductor design automation.  But 99\% of working programmers won't get into those areas.  They'll be stuck doing e-commerce sites forever.
</p><p>
The smart young people I know all seem to be going into either bio or law.  A few years ago, some of them were going into hedge funds, but that seems to be over.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take it from me , a computer science degree definitely wo n't help you get a job .
He may be right .
Which is sad .
I 'm not complaining personally .
I 've been fortunate enough to do plenty of good computer science over the course of a long career .
I 've done everything from networking theory to proof of correctness to autonomous robots .
I 've done web stuff , too , and today write mostly Python , so I 'm not stuck in the past .
But new graduates , especially if they only have a BS , are going to have trouble finding a good career .
Most of the basic problems in the field have been solved , and the ones that remain require deep specialization before you can make progress .
The previous poster is right ; employers want a bunch of buzzwords , because much of programming at the working levels today is knowing how to interface with a huge collection of ever-changing APIs , and those take time to learn .
A century ago , the stationary engineers who set up factories to run on electricity and steam had the same problem .
In 1870 , that was cutting-edge technology .
By 1910 , factory owners just ordered motors and hooked them up .
Today , it 's a union job .
There are good computer science problems to work on today , but it 's hard to find a job that needs them solved .
There 's great stuff going on in machine learning .
Game AIs could get much better .
Robotics is finally starting to work .
Computer vision is getting very good .
There 's a whole world of interesting technology associated with semiconductor design automation .
But 99 \ % of working programmers wo n't get into those areas .
They 'll be stuck doing e-commerce sites forever .
The smart young people I know all seem to be going into either bio or law .
A few years ago , some of them were going into hedge funds , but that seems to be over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Take it from me, a computer science degree definitely won't help you get a job.
He may be right.
Which is sad.
I'm not complaining personally.
I've been fortunate enough to do plenty of good computer science over the course of a long career.
I've done everything from networking theory to proof of correctness to autonomous robots.
I've done web stuff, too, and today write mostly Python, so I'm not stuck in the past.
But new graduates, especially if they only have a BS, are going to have trouble finding a good career.
Most of the basic problems in the field have been solved, and the ones that remain require deep specialization before you can make progress.
The previous poster is right; employers want a bunch of buzzwords, because much of programming at the working levels today is knowing how to interface with a huge collection of ever-changing APIs, and those take time to learn.
A century ago, the stationary engineers who set up factories to run on electricity and steam had the same problem.
In 1870, that was cutting-edge technology.
By 1910, factory owners just ordered motors and hooked them up.
Today, it's a union job.
There are good computer science problems to work on today, but it's hard to find a job that needs them solved.
There's great stuff going on in machine learning.
Game AIs could get much better.
Robotics is finally starting to work.
Computer vision is getting very good.
There's a whole world of interesting technology associated with semiconductor design automation.
But 99\% of working programmers won't get into those areas.
They'll be stuck doing e-commerce sites forever.
The smart young people I know all seem to be going into either bio or law.
A few years ago, some of them were going into hedge funds, but that seems to be over.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669953</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>serviscope\_minor</author>
	<datestamp>1247394180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Learn about... bubble sort...</i></p><p>No, don't. Seriously. If you are at all capable, then *forget* about bubble sort. Erase it from your mind, with surgery if need be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Learn about... bubble sort...No , do n't .
Seriously. If you are at all capable , then * forget * about bubble sort .
Erase it from your mind , with surgery if need be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Learn about... bubble sort...No, don't.
Seriously. If you are at all capable, then *forget* about bubble sort.
Erase it from your mind, with surgery if need be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670217</id>
	<title>Not a bad mix</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1247396220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> The first two semesters are Java, and then you move to Python, C, Bash, Oracle, and Assembly. While I feel that it would be nice to get a well-rounded introduction to the programming world, I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language</p></div></blockquote><p>Sounds like a decent mix to me. I see little reason to complain. Specific languages you could learn on your own since you likely don't know where you will end up. College is only the starting block.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first two semesters are Java , and then you move to Python , C , Bash , Oracle , and Assembly .
While I feel that it would be nice to get a well-rounded introduction to the programming world , I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single languageSounds like a decent mix to me .
I see little reason to complain .
Specific languages you could learn on your own since you likely do n't know where you will end up .
College is only the starting block .
       </tokentext>
<sentencetext> The first two semesters are Java, and then you move to Python, C, Bash, Oracle, and Assembly.
While I feel that it would be nice to get a well-rounded introduction to the programming world, I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single languageSounds like a decent mix to me.
I see little reason to complain.
Specific languages you could learn on your own since you likely don't know where you will end up.
College is only the starting block.
       
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671041</id>
	<title>college graduates don't have experience</title>
	<author>dbc</author>
	<datestamp>1247404080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your question is an oxymoron.  You won't get experience in college.  You will either learn to think, or you will not learn to think.  If you learn to think, you will be hired.  If you don't learn to think, you will not be hired, or at least not by the people you want to hire you.</p><p>Hiring managers looking for a particular language have a short term problem, and are probably better off looking at rent-a-coder.  Hiring managers looking for someone who can think don't give a rat's rear end what language you used to develop thinking skills.</p><p>Don't learn a language.  Learn to solve problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your question is an oxymoron .
You wo n't get experience in college .
You will either learn to think , or you will not learn to think .
If you learn to think , you will be hired .
If you do n't learn to think , you will not be hired , or at least not by the people you want to hire you.Hiring managers looking for a particular language have a short term problem , and are probably better off looking at rent-a-coder .
Hiring managers looking for someone who can think do n't give a rat 's rear end what language you used to develop thinking skills.Do n't learn a language .
Learn to solve problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your question is an oxymoron.
You won't get experience in college.
You will either learn to think, or you will not learn to think.
If you learn to think, you will be hired.
If you don't learn to think, you will not be hired, or at least not by the people you want to hire you.Hiring managers looking for a particular language have a short term problem, and are probably better off looking at rent-a-coder.
Hiring managers looking for someone who can think don't give a rat's rear end what language you used to develop thinking skills.Don't learn a language.
Learn to solve problems.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673559</id>
	<title>Tools Tools Tools</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247477400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He who dies with the most tools wins. </p><p>All languages are tools and this should be taught at college/uni/whatever.</p><p>I have a terribly inquisitive mind to the point of distraction which means my projects tend to grind to a halt while I figure out the most effecient way to deal with something, rather than getting something to work at all.</p><p>This is why I started off learning C and ended up with assembler,</p><p>Looking back I learned more about stacks and and data structures using assembler than I did using Java.</p><p>I think it is most helpful to see what C code gets compiled into and how it could be optimized using other assembler instructions. I saw a wonderful example of this for x86 for arbitrarily sized integers. One or two instructions could be exchanged for a whole bunch of logic in C.</p><p>Java can be really bad if taught before any other language.<br>"An Object is not a pointer, it's a reference which just happens to throw NullPointerException when it doesn't point to^H^H^H^H reference anything" this confuses the hell out of just about everyone I met when passing objects into functions.</p><p>I wide variety of languages should be taught at what they are good for.</p><p>Prolog for weird stuff</p><p>Assembler to see how the guts work and what a pointer is.</p><p>C for reasonably simple maths based stuff</p><p>C++ for code that is to be maintained and developed</p><p>Java similar but also for throwing portable undefined instantiable objects across a network.</p><p>Interpreted/scripted stuff for getting stuff done quickly in an afternoon to get your boss off your back.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He who dies with the most tools wins .
All languages are tools and this should be taught at college/uni/whatever.I have a terribly inquisitive mind to the point of distraction which means my projects tend to grind to a halt while I figure out the most effecient way to deal with something , rather than getting something to work at all.This is why I started off learning C and ended up with assembler,Looking back I learned more about stacks and and data structures using assembler than I did using Java.I think it is most helpful to see what C code gets compiled into and how it could be optimized using other assembler instructions .
I saw a wonderful example of this for x86 for arbitrarily sized integers .
One or two instructions could be exchanged for a whole bunch of logic in C.Java can be really bad if taught before any other language .
" An Object is not a pointer , it 's a reference which just happens to throw NullPointerException when it does n't point to ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H reference anything " this confuses the hell out of just about everyone I met when passing objects into functions.I wide variety of languages should be taught at what they are good for.Prolog for weird stuffAssembler to see how the guts work and what a pointer is.C for reasonably simple maths based stuffC + + for code that is to be maintained and developedJava similar but also for throwing portable undefined instantiable objects across a network.Interpreted/scripted stuff for getting stuff done quickly in an afternoon to get your boss off your back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He who dies with the most tools wins.
All languages are tools and this should be taught at college/uni/whatever.I have a terribly inquisitive mind to the point of distraction which means my projects tend to grind to a halt while I figure out the most effecient way to deal with something, rather than getting something to work at all.This is why I started off learning C and ended up with assembler,Looking back I learned more about stacks and and data structures using assembler than I did using Java.I think it is most helpful to see what C code gets compiled into and how it could be optimized using other assembler instructions.
I saw a wonderful example of this for x86 for arbitrarily sized integers.
One or two instructions could be exchanged for a whole bunch of logic in C.Java can be really bad if taught before any other language.
"An Object is not a pointer, it's a reference which just happens to throw NullPointerException when it doesn't point to^H^H^H^H reference anything" this confuses the hell out of just about everyone I met when passing objects into functions.I wide variety of languages should be taught at what they are good for.Prolog for weird stuffAssembler to see how the guts work and what a pointer is.C for reasonably simple maths based stuffC++ for code that is to be maintained and developedJava similar but also for throwing portable undefined instantiable objects across a network.Interpreted/scripted stuff for getting stuff done quickly in an afternoon to get your boss off your back.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673453</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247475600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you ever asked an astronomer about telescopes? You can't shut them up! They know more than it's healthy to know about telescopes. Astronomy might not be about telescopes in a vague, abstract sense but it doesn't stop astronomers from knowing every damn thing about them and then some. The same could be said for computer scientists and languages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you ever asked an astronomer about telescopes ?
You ca n't shut them up !
They know more than it 's healthy to know about telescopes .
Astronomy might not be about telescopes in a vague , abstract sense but it does n't stop astronomers from knowing every damn thing about them and then some .
The same could be said for computer scientists and languages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you ever asked an astronomer about telescopes?
You can't shut them up!
They know more than it's healthy to know about telescopes.
Astronomy might not be about telescopes in a vague, abstract sense but it doesn't stop astronomers from knowing every damn thing about them and then some.
The same could be said for computer scientists and languages.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670361</id>
	<title>Nobody knows what the futire flavour of the month</title>
	<author>digitig</author>
	<datestamp>1247397660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>By the time you get out of college things are pretty much certain to have changed. Learn the same language as everybody else and you'll be just like anybody else. Learn a single language and you will get left behind. The only route nowadays is to learn lots of languages, even if you'll never use them, because you'll be learning the <em>real</em> useful skill which is picking up languages quickly and understanding the differences between them. If an employer expects you to be an expert in their flavour of the month then they're not looking for graduate caliber employees, they're looking for a code grunt.</htmltext>
<tokenext>By the time you get out of college things are pretty much certain to have changed .
Learn the same language as everybody else and you 'll be just like anybody else .
Learn a single language and you will get left behind .
The only route nowadays is to learn lots of languages , even if you 'll never use them , because you 'll be learning the real useful skill which is picking up languages quickly and understanding the differences between them .
If an employer expects you to be an expert in their flavour of the month then they 're not looking for graduate caliber employees , they 're looking for a code grunt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By the time you get out of college things are pretty much certain to have changed.
Learn the same language as everybody else and you'll be just like anybody else.
Learn a single language and you will get left behind.
The only route nowadays is to learn lots of languages, even if you'll never use them, because you'll be learning the real useful skill which is picking up languages quickly and understanding the differences between them.
If an employer expects you to be an expert in their flavour of the month then they're not looking for graduate caliber employees, they're looking for a code grunt.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671051</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>gd2shoe</author>
	<datestamp>1247404080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Finance? Really?  I thought that was Cobol.</p><p>I don't do science programming, but I'll mention here that I've recently come across SciPy - a science module for python.  Many parts of it are simply wrappers around Fortran code.  It's becoming popular in some circles.</p><p>(If someone is serious about science programming, they must look at Fortran.  I'm only suggesting that they might want to look at SciPy too.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finance ?
Really ? I thought that was Cobol.I do n't do science programming , but I 'll mention here that I 've recently come across SciPy - a science module for python .
Many parts of it are simply wrappers around Fortran code .
It 's becoming popular in some circles .
( If someone is serious about science programming , they must look at Fortran .
I 'm only suggesting that they might want to look at SciPy too .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finance?
Really?  I thought that was Cobol.I don't do science programming, but I'll mention here that I've recently come across SciPy - a science module for python.
Many parts of it are simply wrappers around Fortran code.
It's becoming popular in some circles.
(If someone is serious about science programming, they must look at Fortran.
I'm only suggesting that they might want to look at SciPy too.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669515</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671459</id>
	<title>The second school is right</title>
	<author>Katchu</author>
	<datestamp>1247408220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is no way you are going to become proficient in a language through coursework; only working through time on significant projects will build the necessary expertise. An exposure to a wide variety of language forms and general skills will prepare you for a career: i.e., you're going to continually have to learn new, different languages and concepts if you expect to succeed in programming. Believe me, I know. I tried to spend a career in Fortran, and that didn't work out as expected. Now, get off my lawn<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;^).</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no way you are going to become proficient in a language through coursework ; only working through time on significant projects will build the necessary expertise .
An exposure to a wide variety of language forms and general skills will prepare you for a career : i.e. , you 're going to continually have to learn new , different languages and concepts if you expect to succeed in programming .
Believe me , I know .
I tried to spend a career in Fortran , and that did n't work out as expected .
Now , get off my lawn ; ^ ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no way you are going to become proficient in a language through coursework; only working through time on significant projects will build the necessary expertise.
An exposure to a wide variety of language forms and general skills will prepare you for a career: i.e., you're going to continually have to learn new, different languages and concepts if you expect to succeed in programming.
Believe me, I know.
I tried to spend a career in Fortran, and that didn't work out as expected.
Now, get off my lawn ;^).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28680131</id>
	<title>Real Teaching...</title>
	<author>TemporalBeing</author>
	<datestamp>1247512620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I won't disagree with others that concepts are more important than teaching any one single language - they are, and if I put a curriculum together myself I'd teach no less than 6 different languages.
<br> <br>
However, concepts are not the apex of a degree that colleges (and professors) make them out to be either.
<br> <br>
Students need a balanced approach between implementing software (programming) using a number of tools (languages) and the theoretical.
Sadly, computer science has largely gone theoretical, almost to the point of complete uselessness.
<br> <br>
This is partially due to the maturity of the field - it's still highly immature, and I don't simply mean that programmers are immature - there are quite a number of very mature programmers. The field is just young compared to all other fields. For example, we need to get over the whole 'programming is art' thing and grow up - yes, there is an artistic aspect to it, just as there is to building a bridge or a car, etc; but it's not all about art, it's about building things. (If you don't agree, then you'll certainly be making a fine example of what I mean by the 'grow up'.)
<br> <br>
We also need degrees that work through problems better, encourage innovation, and teach how to learn from our mistakes. This is the essence of an engineering degree. Talk to a mechanical or electrical engineer about their undergrad program - it's rife with pitting students against each other for the best methods, and upping your score by showing how you learned from the mistakes you made in the design, the whole 'why didn't it work as expected'. Yet, this is exactly what is lacking in nearly every computer curriculum. Students are taught to be code-monkeys ("I told you do it this way, so you better do it this way") with in-flexibility ("well that's what the professor said to do"), and severely lacks on the learning from mistakes. Sure you have to work through a debugger to find the problem - but what about when you design the program, hit the dead-line, and it's still not working? Give up? Re-write? Or dive in, learn what you did wrong, and report on it?
<br> <br>
Yes - I'm pushing for a true software engineering degree that exists as part of every engineering department, not an off-shoot of the mathematics department. Teach the theory, but balance it with implementation. Doesn't have to be anything grandiose - but it does have to prove the points, teach the underlying principle, and give the students opportunity to learn from failure (what went wrong? how could you have avoided the problem?) as well as enjoy the success of competition (who can do it better?!).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wo n't disagree with others that concepts are more important than teaching any one single language - they are , and if I put a curriculum together myself I 'd teach no less than 6 different languages .
However , concepts are not the apex of a degree that colleges ( and professors ) make them out to be either .
Students need a balanced approach between implementing software ( programming ) using a number of tools ( languages ) and the theoretical .
Sadly , computer science has largely gone theoretical , almost to the point of complete uselessness .
This is partially due to the maturity of the field - it 's still highly immature , and I do n't simply mean that programmers are immature - there are quite a number of very mature programmers .
The field is just young compared to all other fields .
For example , we need to get over the whole 'programming is art ' thing and grow up - yes , there is an artistic aspect to it , just as there is to building a bridge or a car , etc ; but it 's not all about art , it 's about building things .
( If you do n't agree , then you 'll certainly be making a fine example of what I mean by the 'grow up' .
) We also need degrees that work through problems better , encourage innovation , and teach how to learn from our mistakes .
This is the essence of an engineering degree .
Talk to a mechanical or electrical engineer about their undergrad program - it 's rife with pitting students against each other for the best methods , and upping your score by showing how you learned from the mistakes you made in the design , the whole 'why did n't it work as expected' .
Yet , this is exactly what is lacking in nearly every computer curriculum .
Students are taught to be code-monkeys ( " I told you do it this way , so you better do it this way " ) with in-flexibility ( " well that 's what the professor said to do " ) , and severely lacks on the learning from mistakes .
Sure you have to work through a debugger to find the problem - but what about when you design the program , hit the dead-line , and it 's still not working ?
Give up ?
Re-write ? Or dive in , learn what you did wrong , and report on it ?
Yes - I 'm pushing for a true software engineering degree that exists as part of every engineering department , not an off-shoot of the mathematics department .
Teach the theory , but balance it with implementation .
Does n't have to be anything grandiose - but it does have to prove the points , teach the underlying principle , and give the students opportunity to learn from failure ( what went wrong ?
how could you have avoided the problem ?
) as well as enjoy the success of competition ( who can do it better ? !
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I won't disagree with others that concepts are more important than teaching any one single language - they are, and if I put a curriculum together myself I'd teach no less than 6 different languages.
However, concepts are not the apex of a degree that colleges (and professors) make them out to be either.
Students need a balanced approach between implementing software (programming) using a number of tools (languages) and the theoretical.
Sadly, computer science has largely gone theoretical, almost to the point of complete uselessness.
This is partially due to the maturity of the field - it's still highly immature, and I don't simply mean that programmers are immature - there are quite a number of very mature programmers.
The field is just young compared to all other fields.
For example, we need to get over the whole 'programming is art' thing and grow up - yes, there is an artistic aspect to it, just as there is to building a bridge or a car, etc; but it's not all about art, it's about building things.
(If you don't agree, then you'll certainly be making a fine example of what I mean by the 'grow up'.
)
 
We also need degrees that work through problems better, encourage innovation, and teach how to learn from our mistakes.
This is the essence of an engineering degree.
Talk to a mechanical or electrical engineer about their undergrad program - it's rife with pitting students against each other for the best methods, and upping your score by showing how you learned from the mistakes you made in the design, the whole 'why didn't it work as expected'.
Yet, this is exactly what is lacking in nearly every computer curriculum.
Students are taught to be code-monkeys ("I told you do it this way, so you better do it this way") with in-flexibility ("well that's what the professor said to do"), and severely lacks on the learning from mistakes.
Sure you have to work through a debugger to find the problem - but what about when you design the program, hit the dead-line, and it's still not working?
Give up?
Re-write? Or dive in, learn what you did wrong, and report on it?
Yes - I'm pushing for a true software engineering degree that exists as part of every engineering department, not an off-shoot of the mathematics department.
Teach the theory, but balance it with implementation.
Doesn't have to be anything grandiose - but it does have to prove the points, teach the underlying principle, and give the students opportunity to learn from failure (what went wrong?
how could you have avoided the problem?
) as well as enjoy the success of competition (who can do it better?!
).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668909</id>
	<title>C# and Bing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247428980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The skills that are in highest demand is the ability to write code in C# and to use Bing.  C# is now the dominant choice among the new-wave languages (which includes Java) that appeared after 1990.  What employers want to see is the ability to write a C# program to automatically issue requests via HTTP to Bing to query the WWW and to retrieve the search results.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The skills that are in highest demand is the ability to write code in C # and to use Bing .
C # is now the dominant choice among the new-wave languages ( which includes Java ) that appeared after 1990 .
What employers want to see is the ability to write a C # program to automatically issue requests via HTTP to Bing to query the WWW and to retrieve the search results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The skills that are in highest demand is the ability to write code in C# and to use Bing.
C# is now the dominant choice among the new-wave languages (which includes Java) that appeared after 1990.
What employers want to see is the ability to write a C# program to automatically issue requests via HTTP to Bing to query the WWW and to retrieve the search results.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672143</id>
	<title>Get an internship</title>
	<author>sportster</author>
	<datestamp>1247414700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I learned the most from an internship.  I got to see code that others had written...good and bad.  Try to modify it.  Write my own bad code (that I thought was good at the time) over and over again until I learned what good code was.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I learned the most from an internship .
I got to see code that others had written...good and bad .
Try to modify it .
Write my own bad code ( that I thought was good at the time ) over and over again until I learned what good code was .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I learned the most from an internship.
I got to see code that others had written...good and bad.
Try to modify it.
Write my own bad code (that I thought was good at the time) over and over again until I learned what good code was.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668979</id>
	<title>That isn't CS.  It isn't even SE.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247429520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any "CS" degree, much less "software engineering" degree, that ever has a course about teaching a language is just a joke.  Find a better CS program at a better school.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any " CS " degree , much less " software engineering " degree , that ever has a course about teaching a language is just a joke .
Find a better CS program at a better school .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any "CS" degree, much less "software engineering" degree, that ever has a course about teaching a language is just a joke.
Find a better CS program at a better school.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669665</id>
	<title>Ripped off</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247392380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you are just learning the basics in 4 to 6 different languagues ("hello world") then you are NOT getting a proper education. If they are teaching the concepts and constructs and giving you an overview in several languages, then perhaps it is a decent school.</p><p>My preference would still be for the school to teach you the concepts and constructs for a single language (maybe 2) throughout your schooling, while making note how it might be done differently in others.</p><p>If you went to blacksmith school and they simply taught "this is a mason's hammer, you use it concrete and brick, this is a ball peen hammer, use it for cold chisels and forming metal, this is a mallet, use it when worried about marring a surface." they haven't actually taught you anything useful other than the type of job for which the tool is designed. If they then have you use the tools to actually bend and form metal and build things, then you have the foundation of an occupation.</p><p>Best bet is to go to a 2-year tech school and get into an internship or coop program. The 4-year CS programs charge an arm and a leg for the basic coursework which is already covered in most high schools. Many never get any better than that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are just learning the basics in 4 to 6 different languagues ( " hello world " ) then you are NOT getting a proper education .
If they are teaching the concepts and constructs and giving you an overview in several languages , then perhaps it is a decent school.My preference would still be for the school to teach you the concepts and constructs for a single language ( maybe 2 ) throughout your schooling , while making note how it might be done differently in others.If you went to blacksmith school and they simply taught " this is a mason 's hammer , you use it concrete and brick , this is a ball peen hammer , use it for cold chisels and forming metal , this is a mallet , use it when worried about marring a surface .
" they have n't actually taught you anything useful other than the type of job for which the tool is designed .
If they then have you use the tools to actually bend and form metal and build things , then you have the foundation of an occupation.Best bet is to go to a 2-year tech school and get into an internship or coop program .
The 4-year CS programs charge an arm and a leg for the basic coursework which is already covered in most high schools .
Many never get any better than that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are just learning the basics in 4 to 6 different languagues ("hello world") then you are NOT getting a proper education.
If they are teaching the concepts and constructs and giving you an overview in several languages, then perhaps it is a decent school.My preference would still be for the school to teach you the concepts and constructs for a single language (maybe 2) throughout your schooling, while making note how it might be done differently in others.If you went to blacksmith school and they simply taught "this is a mason's hammer, you use it concrete and brick, this is a ball peen hammer, use it for cold chisels and forming metal, this is a mallet, use it when worried about marring a surface.
" they haven't actually taught you anything useful other than the type of job for which the tool is designed.
If they then have you use the tools to actually bend and form metal and build things, then you have the foundation of an occupation.Best bet is to go to a 2-year tech school and get into an internship or coop program.
The 4-year CS programs charge an arm and a leg for the basic coursework which is already covered in most high schools.
Many never get any better than that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668965</id>
	<title>Re:Go to a "trade school" for that. Not a universi</title>
	<author>minsk</author>
	<datestamp>1247429460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not unless trade schools suddenly get better, and software engineering programs suddenly become ubiquitous.</p><p>And not while most students learn better by implementing parts of the theory. And not while employers expect them to be half-competent coders.</p><p>And, well, not<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not unless trade schools suddenly get better , and software engineering programs suddenly become ubiquitous.And not while most students learn better by implementing parts of the theory .
And not while employers expect them to be half-competent coders.And , well , not : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not unless trade schools suddenly get better, and software engineering programs suddenly become ubiquitous.And not while most students learn better by implementing parts of the theory.
And not while employers expect them to be half-competent coders.And, well, not :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861</id>
	<title>Hobby</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247428620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>After reading the syllabi, all the higher level classes appear to teach concepts rather than work to develop advanced techniques in a specific language.</p></div><p>It's great that you have it like that. Its the concepts that matter more than just teaching some language dependant pack of tricks. Languages can always be learnt afterwards and quickly, and they also tend to change during years. Concept stay somewhat the same, and those are what you need to understand. I wish I would had the same kind of program in school.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job.</p></div><p>Usually programmers are quite self-taught. Schools can teach you concepts and languages, but the real knowledge comes from when you're interested in it and <b>try out and do stuff</b>. Yes, this means you should have some interest in coding at home for your pleasure too, as a hobby. I would think that programming would being really really boring if you dont have the interest to learn yourself or even program your own stuff at home.</p><p>You didn't mention if you do programming yourself, but if you dont you should start to. Start coding some games yourself or stuff you think are useful to you. Or learn PHP and start coding websites. You can even start to make some cash out of it, either by selling your software/game, running websites or coding as a freelancer. Try out things.</p><p>However the most stupid approach is to think you should be awesome in one language and lack everything else. Usually you need combination of different languages and better understanding generally. Read some programmer job listings and you see how they always contain lots of different thingies and qualities they're looking for. Programming languages used at work will most likely change aswell (Java was hot in some apps programming years ago, but C# and other languages have been stealing position from it). This is why you want to have the general understanding instead of just knowing tricks&amp;tips of one language.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>After reading the syllabi , all the higher level classes appear to teach concepts rather than work to develop advanced techniques in a specific language.It 's great that you have it like that .
Its the concepts that matter more than just teaching some language dependant pack of tricks .
Languages can always be learnt afterwards and quickly , and they also tend to change during years .
Concept stay somewhat the same , and those are what you need to understand .
I wish I would had the same kind of program in school.I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job.Usually programmers are quite self-taught .
Schools can teach you concepts and languages , but the real knowledge comes from when you 're interested in it and try out and do stuff .
Yes , this means you should have some interest in coding at home for your pleasure too , as a hobby .
I would think that programming would being really really boring if you dont have the interest to learn yourself or even program your own stuff at home.You did n't mention if you do programming yourself , but if you dont you should start to .
Start coding some games yourself or stuff you think are useful to you .
Or learn PHP and start coding websites .
You can even start to make some cash out of it , either by selling your software/game , running websites or coding as a freelancer .
Try out things.However the most stupid approach is to think you should be awesome in one language and lack everything else .
Usually you need combination of different languages and better understanding generally .
Read some programmer job listings and you see how they always contain lots of different thingies and qualities they 're looking for .
Programming languages used at work will most likely change aswell ( Java was hot in some apps programming years ago , but C # and other languages have been stealing position from it ) .
This is why you want to have the general understanding instead of just knowing tricks&amp;tips of one language .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After reading the syllabi, all the higher level classes appear to teach concepts rather than work to develop advanced techniques in a specific language.It's great that you have it like that.
Its the concepts that matter more than just teaching some language dependant pack of tricks.
Languages can always be learnt afterwards and quickly, and they also tend to change during years.
Concept stay somewhat the same, and those are what you need to understand.
I wish I would had the same kind of program in school.I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job.Usually programmers are quite self-taught.
Schools can teach you concepts and languages, but the real knowledge comes from when you're interested in it and try out and do stuff.
Yes, this means you should have some interest in coding at home for your pleasure too, as a hobby.
I would think that programming would being really really boring if you dont have the interest to learn yourself or even program your own stuff at home.You didn't mention if you do programming yourself, but if you dont you should start to.
Start coding some games yourself or stuff you think are useful to you.
Or learn PHP and start coding websites.
You can even start to make some cash out of it, either by selling your software/game, running websites or coding as a freelancer.
Try out things.However the most stupid approach is to think you should be awesome in one language and lack everything else.
Usually you need combination of different languages and better understanding generally.
Read some programmer job listings and you see how they always contain lots of different thingies and qualities they're looking for.
Programming languages used at work will most likely change aswell (Java was hot in some apps programming years ago, but C# and other languages have been stealing position from it).
This is why you want to have the general understanding instead of just knowing tricks&amp;tips of one language.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131</id>
	<title>Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247430780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Learn about Binary Search Trees, Red Black Trees, Bubble Sort, Quick Sort, Heaps, etc.  Those are the important things to know.  Bob Dylan is not famous for knowing English grammar and spelling.  He is famous for what he does with them.  Teach him Chinese, and he can most likely make amazing songs in Chinese as well.  You didn't go to college to learn grammar and spelling.  You can learn that in elementary school.  Instead, you're going to college to learn how to use the language to create amazing things.  It is an abstract level above the syntax level you see on the computer screen, and it is something crucial that anyone learning anything in college \_must\_ understand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Learn about Binary Search Trees , Red Black Trees , Bubble Sort , Quick Sort , Heaps , etc .
Those are the important things to know .
Bob Dylan is not famous for knowing English grammar and spelling .
He is famous for what he does with them .
Teach him Chinese , and he can most likely make amazing songs in Chinese as well .
You did n't go to college to learn grammar and spelling .
You can learn that in elementary school .
Instead , you 're going to college to learn how to use the language to create amazing things .
It is an abstract level above the syntax level you see on the computer screen , and it is something crucial that anyone learning anything in college \ _must \ _ understand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Learn about Binary Search Trees, Red Black Trees, Bubble Sort, Quick Sort, Heaps, etc.
Those are the important things to know.
Bob Dylan is not famous for knowing English grammar and spelling.
He is famous for what he does with them.
Teach him Chinese, and he can most likely make amazing songs in Chinese as well.
You didn't go to college to learn grammar and spelling.
You can learn that in elementary school.
Instead, you're going to college to learn how to use the language to create amazing things.
It is an abstract level above the syntax level you see on the computer screen, and it is something crucial that anyone learning anything in college \_must\_ understand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670169</id>
	<title>What you need to do</title>
	<author>Orion Blastar</author>
	<datestamp>1247395800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is learn how to learn on your own. Take what you learned in college and learn to do your own research so that you can learn any programming language, data structure, whatever on your own after college is over.</p><p>Keep in mind that technologies change almost every three years or so, which means what you know today may be out of date in three years, or more. So even after college you need to keep learning to stay up to date on whatever technology that you use.</p><p>Which means you need to learn how to solve problems, work as a team, work with a help desk, work with quality assurance, meet with people to help in the analysis and design of a program, learn important communication skills in person and in email, learn how to document things, how to do project management, how to debug your programs,how to prototype your program and work in a beta test environment, etc. Most of these things you won't learn in college and will have to learn them from a mentor or on your own, or by trial and error and learn from your mistakes.</p><p>While OpenGL and Oracle are not programming languages, I assume you made a typo. OpenGL is a library and a set of API calls, and it is good to learn that so that you can learn to use other libraries and API calls. Oracle is a database that uses PL/SQL for database queries, but you need to learn other databases as well like MS-SQL Server, MySQL, PostgreSQL, Firebird, etc because you never know what an employer might use. You need to learn a variety of programming languages, libraries, databases, etc and then learn how to change and adapt to new ones as needed.</p><p>This is very complex and goes beyond what college and Comp Sci classes can teach. For example colleges teach how to write small programs, but employers want tens of thousands of lines of code or more for their large programs that are complex and very hard to maintain and need constant changing and adapting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is learn how to learn on your own .
Take what you learned in college and learn to do your own research so that you can learn any programming language , data structure , whatever on your own after college is over.Keep in mind that technologies change almost every three years or so , which means what you know today may be out of date in three years , or more .
So even after college you need to keep learning to stay up to date on whatever technology that you use.Which means you need to learn how to solve problems , work as a team , work with a help desk , work with quality assurance , meet with people to help in the analysis and design of a program , learn important communication skills in person and in email , learn how to document things , how to do project management , how to debug your programs,how to prototype your program and work in a beta test environment , etc .
Most of these things you wo n't learn in college and will have to learn them from a mentor or on your own , or by trial and error and learn from your mistakes.While OpenGL and Oracle are not programming languages , I assume you made a typo .
OpenGL is a library and a set of API calls , and it is good to learn that so that you can learn to use other libraries and API calls .
Oracle is a database that uses PL/SQL for database queries , but you need to learn other databases as well like MS-SQL Server , MySQL , PostgreSQL , Firebird , etc because you never know what an employer might use .
You need to learn a variety of programming languages , libraries , databases , etc and then learn how to change and adapt to new ones as needed.This is very complex and goes beyond what college and Comp Sci classes can teach .
For example colleges teach how to write small programs , but employers want tens of thousands of lines of code or more for their large programs that are complex and very hard to maintain and need constant changing and adapting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is learn how to learn on your own.
Take what you learned in college and learn to do your own research so that you can learn any programming language, data structure, whatever on your own after college is over.Keep in mind that technologies change almost every three years or so, which means what you know today may be out of date in three years, or more.
So even after college you need to keep learning to stay up to date on whatever technology that you use.Which means you need to learn how to solve problems, work as a team, work with a help desk, work with quality assurance, meet with people to help in the analysis and design of a program, learn important communication skills in person and in email, learn how to document things, how to do project management, how to debug your programs,how to prototype your program and work in a beta test environment, etc.
Most of these things you won't learn in college and will have to learn them from a mentor or on your own, or by trial and error and learn from your mistakes.While OpenGL and Oracle are not programming languages, I assume you made a typo.
OpenGL is a library and a set of API calls, and it is good to learn that so that you can learn to use other libraries and API calls.
Oracle is a database that uses PL/SQL for database queries, but you need to learn other databases as well like MS-SQL Server, MySQL, PostgreSQL, Firebird, etc because you never know what an employer might use.
You need to learn a variety of programming languages, libraries, databases, etc and then learn how to change and adapt to new ones as needed.This is very complex and goes beyond what college and Comp Sci classes can teach.
For example colleges teach how to write small programs, but employers want tens of thousands of lines of code or more for their large programs that are complex and very hard to maintain and need constant changing and adapting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670063</id>
	<title>Never mind all that. All you need is Mono</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247394960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>C#  and Mono. Forget everything else you have heard. Mono is one and only future of programming in this life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>C # and Mono .
Forget everything else you have heard .
Mono is one and only future of programming in this life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>C#  and Mono.
Forget everything else you have heard.
Mono is one and only future of programming in this life.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669425</id>
	<title>You'll be learning different things as you go.</title>
	<author>yacoob</author>
	<datestamp>1247390400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I believe that school should run you through...<br>* A bit about assembly. You're going to learn how CPU is built, right?<br>* C. To make you think about algorithms once you know how things run.<br>* Lisp. To make you understand functional programming.<br>* Java/Python. Probably the latter, to show you OO approach.</p><p>Apart from that, learn on your own whatever seems to be the current fad. You'll be changing the languages you write in anyway, but with some basics it should be easy.<br>Knowing the libraries and "ecosystem" of specific languages, well, that's totally different story. Can't give you an advice here, as I'm not a developer<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I believe that school should run you through... * A bit about assembly .
You 're going to learn how CPU is built , right ?
* C. To make you think about algorithms once you know how things run .
* Lisp .
To make you understand functional programming .
* Java/Python .
Probably the latter , to show you OO approach.Apart from that , learn on your own whatever seems to be the current fad .
You 'll be changing the languages you write in anyway , but with some basics it should be easy.Knowing the libraries and " ecosystem " of specific languages , well , that 's totally different story .
Ca n't give you an advice here , as I 'm not a developer : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I believe that school should run you through...* A bit about assembly.
You're going to learn how CPU is built, right?
* C. To make you think about algorithms once you know how things run.
* Lisp.
To make you understand functional programming.
* Java/Python.
Probably the latter, to show you OO approach.Apart from that, learn on your own whatever seems to be the current fad.
You'll be changing the languages you write in anyway, but with some basics it should be easy.Knowing the libraries and "ecosystem" of specific languages, well, that's totally different story.
Can't give you an advice here, as I'm not a developer :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672393</id>
	<title>Just learn lots of languages if you can</title>
	<author>bigsexyjoe</author>
	<datestamp>1247417580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>First of all I'm going to a take a contrary view to other commenters.  Most of them are saying "don't treat school like trade school.  Learn theory."  I disagree.  While you are getting a degree in computer science, I'm guessing you don't actually want to work as a computer scientist.  You want to work as a software engineer.  While you should get exposure to algorithms and stuff and I'm sure you will, what you really need is practical skills that will get you hired.  Then you will learn theory on the job.  Not CS theory, but software engineering theory which is good coding practices, project management etc.  You might need to know some more CS theory in the end, but you can learn that at work as well.  The most important thing you can get out of school is a job.  It's not like you can never learn again.

Anyway, your prospective employers aren't going to believe you have such an in depth understanding of a certain language even if you do.  So what can you do.  Learn a lot of languages and have lots on your resume.  Make sure you don't just know different languages.  Figure out what you want to get into and take classes in that (databases, web, systems programming, games).  But this "in depth" knowledge thing isn't so important at this stage.</htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all I 'm going to a take a contrary view to other commenters .
Most of them are saying " do n't treat school like trade school .
Learn theory .
" I disagree .
While you are getting a degree in computer science , I 'm guessing you do n't actually want to work as a computer scientist .
You want to work as a software engineer .
While you should get exposure to algorithms and stuff and I 'm sure you will , what you really need is practical skills that will get you hired .
Then you will learn theory on the job .
Not CS theory , but software engineering theory which is good coding practices , project management etc .
You might need to know some more CS theory in the end , but you can learn that at work as well .
The most important thing you can get out of school is a job .
It 's not like you can never learn again .
Anyway , your prospective employers are n't going to believe you have such an in depth understanding of a certain language even if you do .
So what can you do .
Learn a lot of languages and have lots on your resume .
Make sure you do n't just know different languages .
Figure out what you want to get into and take classes in that ( databases , web , systems programming , games ) .
But this " in depth " knowledge thing is n't so important at this stage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all I'm going to a take a contrary view to other commenters.
Most of them are saying "don't treat school like trade school.
Learn theory.
"  I disagree.
While you are getting a degree in computer science, I'm guessing you don't actually want to work as a computer scientist.
You want to work as a software engineer.
While you should get exposure to algorithms and stuff and I'm sure you will, what you really need is practical skills that will get you hired.
Then you will learn theory on the job.
Not CS theory, but software engineering theory which is good coding practices, project management etc.
You might need to know some more CS theory in the end, but you can learn that at work as well.
The most important thing you can get out of school is a job.
It's not like you can never learn again.
Anyway, your prospective employers aren't going to believe you have such an in depth understanding of a certain language even if you do.
So what can you do.
Learn a lot of languages and have lots on your resume.
Make sure you don't just know different languages.
Figure out what you want to get into and take classes in that (databases, web, systems programming, games).
But this "in depth" knowledge thing isn't so important at this stage.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669019</id>
	<title>Wrong question</title>
	<author>marnues</author>
	<datestamp>1247429880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>We can't help you unless you tell us what job you want.  If you want a job from a computer science degree, then you shouldn't be worried about language specific concepts.  Those are for code monkeys.  If you want to be a code monkey then you probably want a different degree.  My degree is in Computer Engineering (though it has a much greater CS bent than EE).  I came out of college knowing that I would never work in a higher level language than C.  I didn't need roadblocks to perfect hardware control.

Now I work as an "Application Developer."  I design and write code from the ground up.  I had a much more difficult time picking up the specifics of Java than my Software Engineer and Programming degree'd brethren.  But because of my background I finally understood why higher level languages were made.  None of my co-workers appreciate the simplicity and elegance of sticking to a pure OOP model (since we work on our own projects, the lack of collaboration has made the Software Engineers lazy).  None of them understand exactly what the JVM is or how the Garbage Collector works.  They worry about optimizing code down to removing method calls when we're doing networking...they don't understand that the nanoseconds saved by not making the method call not only makes the code more difficult to read, it also has no appreciable effect since the SNMP call before it took milliseconds (sometimes even seconds).<br>
<br>
Almost more important to any of that though is the changing nature of the business.  The 2 Computer Programmer degrees on the team are having a very difficult time moving to the new Java EE standards.  We'll be picking up Glassfish v3 and Java EE 6 here soon and will have to update our code. I and the Software Engineers are rejoicing since we understand the benefits even though it means more learning and more work in the short-term.  The Computer Programmers on the team are annoyed since they have to learn new concepts and re-work code.<br>
<br>
So, do you want to be stuck to the language specific concepts that will make you readily employable?  Or do you want breadth of knowledge that enables you to do pick up any task?  The choice is yours.  But your question is lacking until we know this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We ca n't help you unless you tell us what job you want .
If you want a job from a computer science degree , then you should n't be worried about language specific concepts .
Those are for code monkeys .
If you want to be a code monkey then you probably want a different degree .
My degree is in Computer Engineering ( though it has a much greater CS bent than EE ) .
I came out of college knowing that I would never work in a higher level language than C. I did n't need roadblocks to perfect hardware control .
Now I work as an " Application Developer .
" I design and write code from the ground up .
I had a much more difficult time picking up the specifics of Java than my Software Engineer and Programming degree 'd brethren .
But because of my background I finally understood why higher level languages were made .
None of my co-workers appreciate the simplicity and elegance of sticking to a pure OOP model ( since we work on our own projects , the lack of collaboration has made the Software Engineers lazy ) .
None of them understand exactly what the JVM is or how the Garbage Collector works .
They worry about optimizing code down to removing method calls when we 're doing networking...they do n't understand that the nanoseconds saved by not making the method call not only makes the code more difficult to read , it also has no appreciable effect since the SNMP call before it took milliseconds ( sometimes even seconds ) .
Almost more important to any of that though is the changing nature of the business .
The 2 Computer Programmer degrees on the team are having a very difficult time moving to the new Java EE standards .
We 'll be picking up Glassfish v3 and Java EE 6 here soon and will have to update our code .
I and the Software Engineers are rejoicing since we understand the benefits even though it means more learning and more work in the short-term .
The Computer Programmers on the team are annoyed since they have to learn new concepts and re-work code .
So , do you want to be stuck to the language specific concepts that will make you readily employable ?
Or do you want breadth of knowledge that enables you to do pick up any task ?
The choice is yours .
But your question is lacking until we know this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We can't help you unless you tell us what job you want.
If you want a job from a computer science degree, then you shouldn't be worried about language specific concepts.
Those are for code monkeys.
If you want to be a code monkey then you probably want a different degree.
My degree is in Computer Engineering (though it has a much greater CS bent than EE).
I came out of college knowing that I would never work in a higher level language than C.  I didn't need roadblocks to perfect hardware control.
Now I work as an "Application Developer.
"  I design and write code from the ground up.
I had a much more difficult time picking up the specifics of Java than my Software Engineer and Programming degree'd brethren.
But because of my background I finally understood why higher level languages were made.
None of my co-workers appreciate the simplicity and elegance of sticking to a pure OOP model (since we work on our own projects, the lack of collaboration has made the Software Engineers lazy).
None of them understand exactly what the JVM is or how the Garbage Collector works.
They worry about optimizing code down to removing method calls when we're doing networking...they don't understand that the nanoseconds saved by not making the method call not only makes the code more difficult to read, it also has no appreciable effect since the SNMP call before it took milliseconds (sometimes even seconds).
Almost more important to any of that though is the changing nature of the business.
The 2 Computer Programmer degrees on the team are having a very difficult time moving to the new Java EE standards.
We'll be picking up Glassfish v3 and Java EE 6 here soon and will have to update our code.
I and the Software Engineers are rejoicing since we understand the benefits even though it means more learning and more work in the short-term.
The Computer Programmers on the team are annoyed since they have to learn new concepts and re-work code.
So, do you want to be stuck to the language specific concepts that will make you readily employable?
Or do you want breadth of knowledge that enables you to do pick up any task?
The choice is yours.
But your question is lacking until we know this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28682035</id>
	<title>Ask Slashdot: Which Language Approach For a Comput</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247477100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a now old software engineer, this question, and some of answers sadden me bit!<br>If there are unquestionably somewhat better languages "du jour", that is not what is so important.<br>What is important, is to understand what you do!</p><p>And if you write a very nice piece of code, in say Pascal, rewriting it in C is very easy.<br>What counts as suggested above, is the quality of thinking in the algorithms, this is where Donald Knut, Dijskra, Tanenbaum, and some other great name in computer science have put the emphasis.</p><p>To get a job, indeed requires to know the language use for the project.<br>But if you know any structured language, going from Pacal, or Algol to C, requires very little work (excepted for the tools... which are also important).<br>If you know one OO language going from one to another is also quite easy.<br>For the libraries, they tend now to be multi-languages...</p><p>Programing in assembly is almost another discussion: it is the language used for "low level logic", and if you have written lots of assembly for one machine, you will have no problem writing in assembly for another! (It take some time though). But here you need to understand low level logic concepts. (Borrow, carry, shits, etc...)</p><p>Same for use of pointers: it is almost language agnostic! Just learn how to use them for linked lists, functions calls by mean of pointers, ashing algorithms, and more...</p><p>About SQL, it is more an application, than a language... (See the OSI seven layers.)</p><p>About languages, I tend to regret that some of the very best languages ever designed, Prolog (A Lisp derivative) and Eiffel (OO language with smart assertions support), are rarely used, and so far poorly supported by the open source community.<br>Here the accusation that the open source community copies a lot, and creates little is unfortunately verified. Human nature may be?</p><p>About tools see:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; SED, TECO (old but amazing!), TEX and LATEX, any excellent debugger (Don Knut mentioned that his language of choice was the one with the best debugger, I agree!).<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; TAGS (see etags, ctags, gtags).</p><p>I was too long. Sorry.</p><p>A.G</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a now old software engineer , this question , and some of answers sadden me bit ! If there are unquestionably somewhat better languages " du jour " , that is not what is so important.What is important , is to understand what you do ! And if you write a very nice piece of code , in say Pascal , rewriting it in C is very easy.What counts as suggested above , is the quality of thinking in the algorithms , this is where Donald Knut , Dijskra , Tanenbaum , and some other great name in computer science have put the emphasis.To get a job , indeed requires to know the language use for the project.But if you know any structured language , going from Pacal , or Algol to C , requires very little work ( excepted for the tools... which are also important ) .If you know one OO language going from one to another is also quite easy.For the libraries , they tend now to be multi-languages...Programing in assembly is almost another discussion : it is the language used for " low level logic " , and if you have written lots of assembly for one machine , you will have no problem writing in assembly for another !
( It take some time though ) .
But here you need to understand low level logic concepts .
( Borrow , carry , shits , etc... ) Same for use of pointers : it is almost language agnostic !
Just learn how to use them for linked lists , functions calls by mean of pointers , ashing algorithms , and more...About SQL , it is more an application , than a language... ( See the OSI seven layers .
) About languages , I tend to regret that some of the very best languages ever designed , Prolog ( A Lisp derivative ) and Eiffel ( OO language with smart assertions support ) , are rarely used , and so far poorly supported by the open source community.Here the accusation that the open source community copies a lot , and creates little is unfortunately verified .
Human nature may be ? About tools see :     SED , TECO ( old but amazing !
) , TEX and LATEX , any excellent debugger ( Don Knut mentioned that his language of choice was the one with the best debugger , I agree ! ) .
    TAGS ( see etags , ctags , gtags ) .I was too long .
Sorry.A.G</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a now old software engineer, this question, and some of answers sadden me bit!If there are unquestionably somewhat better languages "du jour", that is not what is so important.What is important, is to understand what you do!And if you write a very nice piece of code, in say Pascal, rewriting it in C is very easy.What counts as suggested above, is the quality of thinking in the algorithms, this is where Donald Knut, Dijskra, Tanenbaum, and some other great name in computer science have put the emphasis.To get a job, indeed requires to know the language use for the project.But if you know any structured language, going from Pacal, or Algol to C, requires very little work (excepted for the tools... which are also important).If you know one OO language going from one to another is also quite easy.For the libraries, they tend now to be multi-languages...Programing in assembly is almost another discussion: it is the language used for "low level logic", and if you have written lots of assembly for one machine, you will have no problem writing in assembly for another!
(It take some time though).
But here you need to understand low level logic concepts.
(Borrow, carry, shits, etc...)Same for use of pointers: it is almost language agnostic!
Just learn how to use them for linked lists, functions calls by mean of pointers, ashing algorithms, and more...About SQL, it is more an application, than a language... (See the OSI seven layers.
)About languages, I tend to regret that some of the very best languages ever designed, Prolog (A Lisp derivative) and Eiffel (OO language with smart assertions support), are rarely used, and so far poorly supported by the open source community.Here the accusation that the open source community copies a lot, and creates little is unfortunately verified.
Human nature may be?About tools see:
    SED, TECO (old but amazing!
), TEX and LATEX, any excellent debugger (Don Knut mentioned that his language of choice was the one with the best debugger, I agree!).
    TAGS (see etags, ctags, gtags).I was too long.
Sorry.A.G</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28678223</id>
	<title>Re:Communication is most important of all!</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1247506320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(C++ today isn't what it was 10 years ago...)</p></div><p>Actually I learned C++ a little over 10 years ago and I use it almost exclusively in my current job...  I don't feel like much has changed, except that the compilers have gotten better and now support the standard much better.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( C + + today is n't what it was 10 years ago... ) Actually I learned C + + a little over 10 years ago and I use it almost exclusively in my current job... I do n't feel like much has changed , except that the compilers have gotten better and now support the standard much better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(C++ today isn't what it was 10 years ago...)Actually I learned C++ a little over 10 years ago and I use it almost exclusively in my current job...  I don't feel like much has changed, except that the compilers have gotten better and now support the standard much better.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669797</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669005</id>
	<title>Other "language skills" you may need</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247429760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, or whatever the hell those Indian tech support people speak (claimed to be English, but clearly not). Seriously, you'll need to know one of those languages so you can move to where all the programming jobs will be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chinese , Tagalog , Vietnamese , or whatever the hell those Indian tech support people speak ( claimed to be English , but clearly not ) .
Seriously , you 'll need to know one of those languages so you can move to where all the programming jobs will be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, or whatever the hell those Indian tech support people speak (claimed to be English, but clearly not).
Seriously, you'll need to know one of those languages so you can move to where all the programming jobs will be.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669345</id>
	<title>Re:Go with the way your new school does it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247389620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Java does require careful memory management. It just doesn't require (or allow) explicit memory management beyond allocation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Java does require careful memory management .
It just does n't require ( or allow ) explicit memory management beyond allocation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Java does require careful memory management.
It just doesn't require (or allow) explicit memory management beyond allocation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668957</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671023</id>
	<title>Best Language? None / All.</title>
	<author>Walkey</author>
	<datestamp>1247403900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like others have said language does not really matter (in school). What matters is:<br>
1/ ability to analyse the problem (critical thinking);<br>
2/ ability to find the best answer possible (algorithms, requirements analysis, proof of concept, choose the tool appropriate to the task = concepts);<br>
3/ ability to understand the potential issues and find solutions.
<br> <br>
No method of teaching will provide you with proper experience. The only way to get experience is to actually develop a real world application. Get out there (while you study), get yourself a job where you need to use your newly acquired programming skills (you may have to start at a cheap rate, or you may not), get involved in projects (school/uni, Internet) or make your own project with a clear goal and deadlines in mind.
<br> <br>
This is what will give you the best experience.
<br> <br>
Besides no one can answer which is the best language because there is no answer to that question. It all depends what you're trying to achieve, it depends who you intend to work for, what industry, what type of project...
<br> <br>
The aviation industry for instance tends to lag 10 to 20 years behind (though not always); banking could be anything between bleeding edge modern day technology and 30 years old; web companies tend to be on the cutting edge - but there is some inertia too depending how old the company is. Some industries require you to have highly reliable applications with heavy multitasking, others require difficult real-time engineering while some are happy with plain sequential code on a single processor. It all depends on the task that needs solving.
<br> <br>
Your best bet is to do some research on the topics of particular interest to you. But well rounded sounds good to me.
<br> <br>
You will only get experience once you start working in earnest.
<br> <br>
Enjoy,<br>
w</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like others have said language does not really matter ( in school ) .
What matters is : 1/ ability to analyse the problem ( critical thinking ) ; 2/ ability to find the best answer possible ( algorithms , requirements analysis , proof of concept , choose the tool appropriate to the task = concepts ) ; 3/ ability to understand the potential issues and find solutions .
No method of teaching will provide you with proper experience .
The only way to get experience is to actually develop a real world application .
Get out there ( while you study ) , get yourself a job where you need to use your newly acquired programming skills ( you may have to start at a cheap rate , or you may not ) , get involved in projects ( school/uni , Internet ) or make your own project with a clear goal and deadlines in mind .
This is what will give you the best experience .
Besides no one can answer which is the best language because there is no answer to that question .
It all depends what you 're trying to achieve , it depends who you intend to work for , what industry , what type of project.. . The aviation industry for instance tends to lag 10 to 20 years behind ( though not always ) ; banking could be anything between bleeding edge modern day technology and 30 years old ; web companies tend to be on the cutting edge - but there is some inertia too depending how old the company is .
Some industries require you to have highly reliable applications with heavy multitasking , others require difficult real-time engineering while some are happy with plain sequential code on a single processor .
It all depends on the task that needs solving .
Your best bet is to do some research on the topics of particular interest to you .
But well rounded sounds good to me .
You will only get experience once you start working in earnest .
Enjoy , w</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like others have said language does not really matter (in school).
What matters is:
1/ ability to analyse the problem (critical thinking);
2/ ability to find the best answer possible (algorithms, requirements analysis, proof of concept, choose the tool appropriate to the task = concepts);
3/ ability to understand the potential issues and find solutions.
No method of teaching will provide you with proper experience.
The only way to get experience is to actually develop a real world application.
Get out there (while you study), get yourself a job where you need to use your newly acquired programming skills (you may have to start at a cheap rate, or you may not), get involved in projects (school/uni, Internet) or make your own project with a clear goal and deadlines in mind.
This is what will give you the best experience.
Besides no one can answer which is the best language because there is no answer to that question.
It all depends what you're trying to achieve, it depends who you intend to work for, what industry, what type of project...
 
The aviation industry for instance tends to lag 10 to 20 years behind (though not always); banking could be anything between bleeding edge modern day technology and 30 years old; web companies tend to be on the cutting edge - but there is some inertia too depending how old the company is.
Some industries require you to have highly reliable applications with heavy multitasking, others require difficult real-time engineering while some are happy with plain sequential code on a single processor.
It all depends on the task that needs solving.
Your best bet is to do some research on the topics of particular interest to you.
But well rounded sounds good to me.
You will only get experience once you start working in earnest.
Enjoy,
w</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669511</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>Locutus</author>
	<datestamp>1247391180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the teachers in K-12 will say otherwise. they'll say that teaching "The Word" and teaching "The PowerPoint" is only only way to go because that is what they'll use when they get out of school. Seriously, that's what I've heard and what I've read others have come across. Look back at the OLPC problems once Microsoft got to their customers. Those customers were no longer happy with a tool to teach self teaching but instead were asking for Windows. That's right, they changed their tune and were more concerned what OS was installed instead of what concepts the tool would teach. <br>
&nbsp; </p><p>But, it's the concepts, all about concepts. With a good foundation, you can do a lot more thinking on your own and be more versatile and valuable to your employer. <br>
&nbsp; </p><p>LoB<br>
&nbsp; </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the teachers in K-12 will say otherwise .
they 'll say that teaching " The Word " and teaching " The PowerPoint " is only only way to go because that is what they 'll use when they get out of school .
Seriously , that 's what I 've heard and what I 've read others have come across .
Look back at the OLPC problems once Microsoft got to their customers .
Those customers were no longer happy with a tool to teach self teaching but instead were asking for Windows .
That 's right , they changed their tune and were more concerned what OS was installed instead of what concepts the tool would teach .
  But , it 's the concepts , all about concepts .
With a good foundation , you can do a lot more thinking on your own and be more versatile and valuable to your employer .
  LoB  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>the teachers in K-12 will say otherwise.
they'll say that teaching "The Word" and teaching "The PowerPoint" is only only way to go because that is what they'll use when they get out of school.
Seriously, that's what I've heard and what I've read others have come across.
Look back at the OLPC problems once Microsoft got to their customers.
Those customers were no longer happy with a tool to teach self teaching but instead were asking for Windows.
That's right, they changed their tune and were more concerned what OS was installed instead of what concepts the tool would teach.
  But, it's the concepts, all about concepts.
With a good foundation, you can do a lot more thinking on your own and be more versatile and valuable to your employer.
  LoB
  </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669029</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247429940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>True from the beginning to the end.</p><p>My software for CS degree was a mixture of Windows/.NET/C#/C/C++/cygwin stuff (client side) and Linux/Apache/PHP/Perl and few bash scripts and db (postresql) for the server side.</p><p>Surely I could have done everything on one platform/language, but then it would be a horribly boring task which would only prove that I am trained monkey instead of engineer who always seeks the best tool(s) for the job<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>True from the beginning to the end.My software for CS degree was a mixture of Windows/.NET/C # /C/C + + /cygwin stuff ( client side ) and Linux/Apache/PHP/Perl and few bash scripts and db ( postresql ) for the server side.Surely I could have done everything on one platform/language , but then it would be a horribly boring task which would only prove that I am trained monkey instead of engineer who always seeks the best tool ( s ) for the job : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True from the beginning to the end.My software for CS degree was a mixture of Windows/.NET/C#/C/C++/cygwin stuff (client side) and Linux/Apache/PHP/Perl and few bash scripts and db (postresql) for the server side.Surely I could have done everything on one platform/language, but then it would be a horribly boring task which would only prove that I am trained monkey instead of engineer who always seeks the best tool(s) for the job :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676295</id>
	<title>Language Learning</title>
	<author>g34rs</author>
	<datestamp>1247500080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So here is the skinny on companies for developers:<br>
1) The guys who use you like a tool:<br>
          - Want you to know a specific language already and expect you to be able to churn out code like a bored Amish wife making butter.<br>
          - Don't care about how much "programming" or "conceptual programming" knowledge you know, rather just want the job done.<br>
          - Usually pays pretty low.<br>

2) The guys at say... IBM:<br>
         - Expect you to know your conceptual programming knowledge<br>
         - Expect you to know at least one language pretty solid so that learning other languages (such as their legacy languages like PLMI) comes easy<br>
         - Expect you to ESPECIALLY know how to make your code run 100\% efficiently (I.E. knowing performance statistics compared to other languages, and how they run native on some machines, etc.)<br>
         - Pay scale is usually pretty baller for a developer in this kind of field<br>
<br>
So it's pretty much either one of those. It's useful when you know a lot of languages because its like having more tools on your work bench. If you don't know how each tool works or how it can be used outside of it's "functional" schema, then there's a problem. School can't teach you what you need to know necessarily, it can only provide the foundation for experience to be constructed upon. In other words, think about the job you want in the future (somewhere in the realms listed above), and then study accordingly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So here is the skinny on companies for developers : 1 ) The guys who use you like a tool : - Want you to know a specific language already and expect you to be able to churn out code like a bored Amish wife making butter .
- Do n't care about how much " programming " or " conceptual programming " knowledge you know , rather just want the job done .
- Usually pays pretty low .
2 ) The guys at say... IBM : - Expect you to know your conceptual programming knowledge - Expect you to know at least one language pretty solid so that learning other languages ( such as their legacy languages like PLMI ) comes easy - Expect you to ESPECIALLY know how to make your code run 100 \ % efficiently ( I.E .
knowing performance statistics compared to other languages , and how they run native on some machines , etc .
) - Pay scale is usually pretty baller for a developer in this kind of field So it 's pretty much either one of those .
It 's useful when you know a lot of languages because its like having more tools on your work bench .
If you do n't know how each tool works or how it can be used outside of it 's " functional " schema , then there 's a problem .
School ca n't teach you what you need to know necessarily , it can only provide the foundation for experience to be constructed upon .
In other words , think about the job you want in the future ( somewhere in the realms listed above ) , and then study accordingly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So here is the skinny on companies for developers:
1) The guys who use you like a tool:
          - Want you to know a specific language already and expect you to be able to churn out code like a bored Amish wife making butter.
- Don't care about how much "programming" or "conceptual programming" knowledge you know, rather just want the job done.
- Usually pays pretty low.
2) The guys at say... IBM:
         - Expect you to know your conceptual programming knowledge
         - Expect you to know at least one language pretty solid so that learning other languages (such as their legacy languages like PLMI) comes easy
         - Expect you to ESPECIALLY know how to make your code run 100\% efficiently (I.E.
knowing performance statistics compared to other languages, and how they run native on some machines, etc.
)
         - Pay scale is usually pretty baller for a developer in this kind of field

So it's pretty much either one of those.
It's useful when you know a lot of languages because its like having more tools on your work bench.
If you don't know how each tool works or how it can be used outside of it's "functional" schema, then there's a problem.
School can't teach you what you need to know necessarily, it can only provide the foundation for experience to be constructed upon.
In other words, think about the job you want in the future (somewhere in the realms listed above), and then study accordingly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673893</id>
	<title>Congratulations!</title>
	<author>TMA1</author>
	<datestamp>1247482080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Congratulations!  You've discovered the difference between college and technical school.  Now it's just a question of which you should attend.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Congratulations !
You 've discovered the difference between college and technical school .
Now it 's just a question of which you should attend .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Congratulations!
You've discovered the difference between college and technical school.
Now it's just a question of which you should attend.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674353</id>
	<title>Re:Python is the future</title>
	<author>owlstead</author>
	<datestamp>1247487900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Python instead of Java? No way. Not until the language and tool support gets oodles better than it is now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Python instead of Java ?
No way .
Not until the language and tool support gets oodles better than it is now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Python instead of Java?
No way.
Not until the language and tool support gets oodles better than it is now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668913</id>
	<title>Get out more</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247429100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope you do programming on your own.  You do, right?</p><p>Eveyrone knows you are a college grad.  They know you have shit for experience.  So if you want a better than entry level job, start doing some side work now (open source, hobby projects, anything.)  Seriously though, anyone who hires you knows what they are getting, being a new college grade.  Take the job, get your experience, and move on or up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope you do programming on your own .
You do , right ? Eveyrone knows you are a college grad .
They know you have shit for experience .
So if you want a better than entry level job , start doing some side work now ( open source , hobby projects , anything .
) Seriously though , anyone who hires you knows what they are getting , being a new college grade .
Take the job , get your experience , and move on or up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope you do programming on your own.
You do, right?Eveyrone knows you are a college grad.
They know you have shit for experience.
So if you want a better than entry level job, start doing some side work now (open source, hobby projects, anything.
)  Seriously though, anyone who hires you knows what they are getting, being a new college grade.
Take the job, get your experience, and move on or up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671801</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>iamhassi</author>
	<datestamp>1247411280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job."</i>
<br> <br>I answered this a few months ago on another post.
<a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1155493&amp;cid=27140605" title="slashdot.org">I'll just link to my old post so you guys can follow the links</a> [slashdot.org], but I copied and pasted it below.  Languages to know are C/C++ and Java, everything else is derivative.
<br> <br>
<i>"Since anything you're taught about computers is mostly obsolete in a few years..."
<br> <br>
You're not a programmer, are you? I ask because no programmer would ever say that.
<br> <br>
The C programming language came out in 72 [wikipedia.org], and C++ came a few years later [wikipedia.org]. Both are in the top three most popular programming languages [tiobe.com] "based on the number of skilled engineers world-wide, courses and third party vendors" and they make up 25\% out of the top 20 languages in the list. Although the number one language, Java, makes up 19\%, it "derives much of its syntax from C and C++" and Java came out in 1995 [wikipedia.org].
<br> <br>
Other sources say C is still responsible for nearly 50\% of new open source projects, followed by Java with 28\%. [theregister.co.uk]
<br> <br>
So even if you took a programming class 30 years ago it would still very much apply today.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>" not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job .
" I answered this a few months ago on another post .
I 'll just link to my old post so you guys can follow the links [ slashdot.org ] , but I copied and pasted it below .
Languages to know are C/C + + and Java , everything else is derivative .
" Since anything you 're taught about computers is mostly obsolete in a few years... " You 're not a programmer , are you ?
I ask because no programmer would ever say that .
The C programming language came out in 72 [ wikipedia.org ] , and C + + came a few years later [ wikipedia.org ] .
Both are in the top three most popular programming languages [ tiobe.com ] " based on the number of skilled engineers world-wide , courses and third party vendors " and they make up 25 \ % out of the top 20 languages in the list .
Although the number one language , Java , makes up 19 \ % , it " derives much of its syntax from C and C + + " and Java came out in 1995 [ wikipedia.org ] .
Other sources say C is still responsible for nearly 50 \ % of new open source projects , followed by Java with 28 \ % .
[ theregister.co.uk ] So even if you took a programming class 30 years ago it would still very much apply today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job.
"
 I answered this a few months ago on another post.
I'll just link to my old post so you guys can follow the links [slashdot.org], but I copied and pasted it below.
Languages to know are C/C++ and Java, everything else is derivative.
"Since anything you're taught about computers is mostly obsolete in a few years..."
 
You're not a programmer, are you?
I ask because no programmer would ever say that.
The C programming language came out in 72 [wikipedia.org], and C++ came a few years later [wikipedia.org].
Both are in the top three most popular programming languages [tiobe.com] "based on the number of skilled engineers world-wide, courses and third party vendors" and they make up 25\% out of the top 20 languages in the list.
Although the number one language, Java, makes up 19\%, it "derives much of its syntax from C and C++" and Java came out in 1995 [wikipedia.org].
Other sources say C is still responsible for nearly 50\% of new open source projects, followed by Java with 28\%.
[theregister.co.uk]
 
So even if you took a programming class 30 years ago it would still very much apply today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675937</id>
	<title>OpenGL is not a programming langauge</title>
	<author>stonewolf</author>
	<datestamp>1247498640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Neither is Oracle.</p><p>The fact that you do not even know which of these topics are actually programming languages shows how absolutely worthless your original training was.</p><p>OTOH, I make a fair amount of money teaching programming languages to people who went to schools like your first school. They know C, or they know Java, and now their company is switching to C++ or C# or some other language and they come and take my classes so they can keep their jobs. They don't know enough to be able to teach themselves a new language. That was a skill their "school" didn't teach them.</p><p>BTW, none of the languages I teach existed when I was in school back in the 70s. But, I went to a school where the professors gave home work assignments in what ever language was appropriate. They would give us a hand out detailing how to do simple I/O write a function, create a counted and conditional loop and let us go off and do the work. Could be LISP one week, and FORTRAN the next, with a COBOL chaser... The second course every CS major took covered *concepts* of programming languages and taught a common way to look at them.</p><p>I have never taken a class on a specific language since I left college. (And only then to push up my GPA. All language specific classes were for non-CS majors.) Yet, I can read a book on a language and go teach a class about it to college educated "programmers" who do not know how to learn a new language.</p><p>One other thing, some companies change languages by trying to retrain their programmers and firing the ones who resist the change or who fail to learn the new language. Others just fire everyone who doesn't already know it and hire new people who do.</p><p>Stonewolf</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Neither is Oracle.The fact that you do not even know which of these topics are actually programming languages shows how absolutely worthless your original training was.OTOH , I make a fair amount of money teaching programming languages to people who went to schools like your first school .
They know C , or they know Java , and now their company is switching to C + + or C # or some other language and they come and take my classes so they can keep their jobs .
They do n't know enough to be able to teach themselves a new language .
That was a skill their " school " did n't teach them.BTW , none of the languages I teach existed when I was in school back in the 70s .
But , I went to a school where the professors gave home work assignments in what ever language was appropriate .
They would give us a hand out detailing how to do simple I/O write a function , create a counted and conditional loop and let us go off and do the work .
Could be LISP one week , and FORTRAN the next , with a COBOL chaser... The second course every CS major took covered * concepts * of programming languages and taught a common way to look at them.I have never taken a class on a specific language since I left college .
( And only then to push up my GPA .
All language specific classes were for non-CS majors .
) Yet , I can read a book on a language and go teach a class about it to college educated " programmers " who do not know how to learn a new language.One other thing , some companies change languages by trying to retrain their programmers and firing the ones who resist the change or who fail to learn the new language .
Others just fire everyone who does n't already know it and hire new people who do.Stonewolf  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Neither is Oracle.The fact that you do not even know which of these topics are actually programming languages shows how absolutely worthless your original training was.OTOH, I make a fair amount of money teaching programming languages to people who went to schools like your first school.
They know C, or they know Java, and now their company is switching to C++ or C# or some other language and they come and take my classes so they can keep their jobs.
They don't know enough to be able to teach themselves a new language.
That was a skill their "school" didn't teach them.BTW, none of the languages I teach existed when I was in school back in the 70s.
But, I went to a school where the professors gave home work assignments in what ever language was appropriate.
They would give us a hand out detailing how to do simple I/O write a function, create a counted and conditional loop and let us go off and do the work.
Could be LISP one week, and FORTRAN the next, with a COBOL chaser... The second course every CS major took covered *concepts* of programming languages and taught a common way to look at them.I have never taken a class on a specific language since I left college.
(And only then to push up my GPA.
All language specific classes were for non-CS majors.
) Yet, I can read a book on a language and go teach a class about it to college educated "programmers" who do not know how to learn a new language.One other thing, some companies change languages by trying to retrain their programmers and firing the ones who resist the change or who fail to learn the new language.
Others just fire everyone who doesn't already know it and hire new people who do.Stonewolf
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670855</id>
	<title>Do you really mean for the science?</title>
	<author>Cerebus</author>
	<datestamp>1247402520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or do you mean for a job?</p><p>The two are not necessarily the same.</p><p>I found languages like Lisp, Prolog, and Smalltalk to be of the most use for learning the science.  These are not your sweatshop languages, though.</p><p>On the plus side, if you learn the science, learning a new language isn't tough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or do you mean for a job ? The two are not necessarily the same.I found languages like Lisp , Prolog , and Smalltalk to be of the most use for learning the science .
These are not your sweatshop languages , though.On the plus side , if you learn the science , learning a new language is n't tough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or do you mean for a job?The two are not necessarily the same.I found languages like Lisp, Prolog, and Smalltalk to be of the most use for learning the science.
These are not your sweatshop languages, though.On the plus side, if you learn the science, learning a new language isn't tough.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28684475</id>
	<title>good people vs good workers</title>
	<author>joeaguy</author>
	<datestamp>1247489280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think a general problem with education today is we get really caught up with making "good workers" instead of "good people".</p><p>College is there to make you a better person.   To make you aware of the world and how to think, question, and create, both in a specific field, and in general.  The particular language and the depth of how it is taught and how useful that is for employment are secondary to learning the concepts behind letting your create something useful with whatever tools you may be using.  Of course concrete examples and hands on experience are part of this, but they are just part of the means and not the ends.</p><p>Of course we all need to work for a living, but you never know what the future holds.  Job requirements and environments change, our interests change, our abilities develop, and we keep on being presented with new challenges.  While in college you have a chance to explore and not get bogged down in the details that may be required for survival.  Learn all you can from other subjects especially the humanities, because they give you background on ways to look at the world and examine your place in it.  With this background you'll find you can pick up any specifics you need rather quickly, but more so, you'll be able to apply them that much better.</p><p>Good employers do recognise good people who can solve problems, communicate well, and be creative within their field, and reward them.   If you need to "pay your dues" to get in the door and get some experience with some deep knowledge of something particular (like a certification or the like), don't let the pursuit of that detract from the kind of personal development that you now have a unique opportunity to gain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think a general problem with education today is we get really caught up with making " good workers " instead of " good people " .College is there to make you a better person .
To make you aware of the world and how to think , question , and create , both in a specific field , and in general .
The particular language and the depth of how it is taught and how useful that is for employment are secondary to learning the concepts behind letting your create something useful with whatever tools you may be using .
Of course concrete examples and hands on experience are part of this , but they are just part of the means and not the ends.Of course we all need to work for a living , but you never know what the future holds .
Job requirements and environments change , our interests change , our abilities develop , and we keep on being presented with new challenges .
While in college you have a chance to explore and not get bogged down in the details that may be required for survival .
Learn all you can from other subjects especially the humanities , because they give you background on ways to look at the world and examine your place in it .
With this background you 'll find you can pick up any specifics you need rather quickly , but more so , you 'll be able to apply them that much better.Good employers do recognise good people who can solve problems , communicate well , and be creative within their field , and reward them .
If you need to " pay your dues " to get in the door and get some experience with some deep knowledge of something particular ( like a certification or the like ) , do n't let the pursuit of that detract from the kind of personal development that you now have a unique opportunity to gain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think a general problem with education today is we get really caught up with making "good workers" instead of "good people".College is there to make you a better person.
To make you aware of the world and how to think, question, and create, both in a specific field, and in general.
The particular language and the depth of how it is taught and how useful that is for employment are secondary to learning the concepts behind letting your create something useful with whatever tools you may be using.
Of course concrete examples and hands on experience are part of this, but they are just part of the means and not the ends.Of course we all need to work for a living, but you never know what the future holds.
Job requirements and environments change, our interests change, our abilities develop, and we keep on being presented with new challenges.
While in college you have a chance to explore and not get bogged down in the details that may be required for survival.
Learn all you can from other subjects especially the humanities, because they give you background on ways to look at the world and examine your place in it.
With this background you'll find you can pick up any specifics you need rather quickly, but more so, you'll be able to apply them that much better.Good employers do recognise good people who can solve problems, communicate well, and be creative within their field, and reward them.
If you need to "pay your dues" to get in the door and get some experience with some deep knowledge of something particular (like a certification or the like), don't let the pursuit of that detract from the kind of personal development that you now have a unique opportunity to gain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669011</id>
	<title>Wrong Focus</title>
	<author>nmb3000</author>
	<datestamp>1247429820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>After reading the syllabi, all the higher level classes appear to teach concepts rather than work to develop advanced techniques in a specific language.</i></p><p>Which is exactly as it should be.  The focus of a CS degree should <b>not</b> be "how to write a program in as many languages as possible".  If you want that, go read Wikipedia or <a href="http://99-bottles-of-beer.net/" title="99-bottles-of-beer.net">this</a> [99-bottles-of-beer.net].  I tend to think that the goal of the degree should be (more or less) threefold:</p><p>- Weed out people who have no business programming.  For those who can it seems crazy, but there really are people who just cannot seem to think logically or in an algorithmic fashion.  They should be gone after the first or second class.</p><p>- Teach those unfamiliar with programming at least a single language to act as a starting point and as a language to be used in later classes.  It used to be that C/C++ was the definitive standard for this since you could mix both high and low level techniques, but lately it seems like most places are starting off with a garbage-collected language such as Java, Python, or C# and then moving to C or C++ later on.  In either case, after being 3-4 classes in, the student should be well versed in at least one language.  Ideally those still left that should not be programmers would be gone after this point, but as anyone in the field will tell you, this sadly isn't the case.</p><p>- Stop teaching languages and start teaching algorithms, techniques, and the 'engineering' part of software engineering.  At the end of the day it doesn't matter how many languages you know if you can't use any of them in real-world team-based programming of large and complicated projects.  You also get into the more specialized areas you are interested in such as graphics, AI, computational analysis, etc.</p><p>Some of my least-favorite CS classes were about language and programming theory and while they aren't real exciting or fun, they do make you really think about <b>good</b> solutions to a problem and not just sitting down to "hack something together".  Additionally, all the assignments were language-agnostic, so you could program in whatever you wanted as long as you completed the program spec.</p><p>In short: a decent program should be able to sit down and pick up an unfamiliar language without too much trouble, so I wouldn't worry too much about what language you learn first.  What's important is that you lean to program <b>well</b> -- after that the language just doesn't matter that much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>After reading the syllabi , all the higher level classes appear to teach concepts rather than work to develop advanced techniques in a specific language.Which is exactly as it should be .
The focus of a CS degree should not be " how to write a program in as many languages as possible " .
If you want that , go read Wikipedia or this [ 99-bottles-of-beer.net ] .
I tend to think that the goal of the degree should be ( more or less ) threefold : - Weed out people who have no business programming .
For those who can it seems crazy , but there really are people who just can not seem to think logically or in an algorithmic fashion .
They should be gone after the first or second class.- Teach those unfamiliar with programming at least a single language to act as a starting point and as a language to be used in later classes .
It used to be that C/C + + was the definitive standard for this since you could mix both high and low level techniques , but lately it seems like most places are starting off with a garbage-collected language such as Java , Python , or C # and then moving to C or C + + later on .
In either case , after being 3-4 classes in , the student should be well versed in at least one language .
Ideally those still left that should not be programmers would be gone after this point , but as anyone in the field will tell you , this sadly is n't the case.- Stop teaching languages and start teaching algorithms , techniques , and the 'engineering ' part of software engineering .
At the end of the day it does n't matter how many languages you know if you ca n't use any of them in real-world team-based programming of large and complicated projects .
You also get into the more specialized areas you are interested in such as graphics , AI , computational analysis , etc.Some of my least-favorite CS classes were about language and programming theory and while they are n't real exciting or fun , they do make you really think about good solutions to a problem and not just sitting down to " hack something together " .
Additionally , all the assignments were language-agnostic , so you could program in whatever you wanted as long as you completed the program spec.In short : a decent program should be able to sit down and pick up an unfamiliar language without too much trouble , so I would n't worry too much about what language you learn first .
What 's important is that you lean to program well -- after that the language just does n't matter that much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After reading the syllabi, all the higher level classes appear to teach concepts rather than work to develop advanced techniques in a specific language.Which is exactly as it should be.
The focus of a CS degree should not be "how to write a program in as many languages as possible".
If you want that, go read Wikipedia or this [99-bottles-of-beer.net].
I tend to think that the goal of the degree should be (more or less) threefold:- Weed out people who have no business programming.
For those who can it seems crazy, but there really are people who just cannot seem to think logically or in an algorithmic fashion.
They should be gone after the first or second class.- Teach those unfamiliar with programming at least a single language to act as a starting point and as a language to be used in later classes.
It used to be that C/C++ was the definitive standard for this since you could mix both high and low level techniques, but lately it seems like most places are starting off with a garbage-collected language such as Java, Python, or C# and then moving to C or C++ later on.
In either case, after being 3-4 classes in, the student should be well versed in at least one language.
Ideally those still left that should not be programmers would be gone after this point, but as anyone in the field will tell you, this sadly isn't the case.- Stop teaching languages and start teaching algorithms, techniques, and the 'engineering' part of software engineering.
At the end of the day it doesn't matter how many languages you know if you can't use any of them in real-world team-based programming of large and complicated projects.
You also get into the more specialized areas you are interested in such as graphics, AI, computational analysis, etc.Some of my least-favorite CS classes were about language and programming theory and while they aren't real exciting or fun, they do make you really think about good solutions to a problem and not just sitting down to "hack something together".
Additionally, all the assignments were language-agnostic, so you could program in whatever you wanted as long as you completed the program spec.In short: a decent program should be able to sit down and pick up an unfamiliar language without too much trouble, so I wouldn't worry too much about what language you learn first.
What's important is that you lean to program well -- after that the language just doesn't matter that much.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671181</id>
	<title>Re:Python is the future</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247405460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't worry man! Hold tight and we'll have Perl 6 very soon!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/baselessoptimism</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't worry man !
Hold tight and we 'll have Perl 6 very soon !
/baselessoptimism</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't worry man!
Hold tight and we'll have Perl 6 very soon!
/baselessoptimism</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677023</id>
	<title>Learn the concepts and the languages will follow</title>
	<author>ErrantKbd</author>
	<datestamp>1247502360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't worry too much about learning a particular language.    If you understand the core principles of good programming practice, you will be able to readily take advantage of the feature set of almost any good language.</p><p>In this regard, I think the best book to learn and reinforce the fundamentals of computer science would be Abelson and Sussman's Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs.</p><p><a href="http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book.html" title="mit.edu" rel="nofollow">http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book.html</a> [mit.edu]</p><p>It uses the language called Scheme, which is a *very* slight variation of common lisp that is much simpler.    Lisp is already a very simple language due to its regular syntax (sometimes thought of as "lack of syntax"), and yet it is wickedly powerful and succinct.</p><p>All this being said, if you *really* want to get the most mileage out of learning a particular language, learn C.   It is the inspiration for the syntactic nuances of most new languages that have been created over the last 30 years.   It has been the common-denominator-language that all software developers share.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't worry too much about learning a particular language .
If you understand the core principles of good programming practice , you will be able to readily take advantage of the feature set of almost any good language.In this regard , I think the best book to learn and reinforce the fundamentals of computer science would be Abelson and Sussman 's Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs.http : //mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book.html [ mit.edu ] It uses the language called Scheme , which is a * very * slight variation of common lisp that is much simpler .
Lisp is already a very simple language due to its regular syntax ( sometimes thought of as " lack of syntax " ) , and yet it is wickedly powerful and succinct.All this being said , if you * really * want to get the most mileage out of learning a particular language , learn C. It is the inspiration for the syntactic nuances of most new languages that have been created over the last 30 years .
It has been the common-denominator-language that all software developers share .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't worry too much about learning a particular language.
If you understand the core principles of good programming practice, you will be able to readily take advantage of the feature set of almost any good language.In this regard, I think the best book to learn and reinforce the fundamentals of computer science would be Abelson and Sussman's Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs.http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book.html [mit.edu]It uses the language called Scheme, which is a *very* slight variation of common lisp that is much simpler.
Lisp is already a very simple language due to its regular syntax (sometimes thought of as "lack of syntax"), and yet it is wickedly powerful and succinct.All this being said, if you *really* want to get the most mileage out of learning a particular language, learn C.   It is the inspiration for the syntactic nuances of most new languages that have been created over the last 30 years.
It has been the common-denominator-language that all software developers share.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669555</id>
	<title>Better to learn lots of languages at university</title>
	<author>Shamenaught</author>
	<datestamp>1247391540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>After leaving university, I've worked in 6+ different programming languages. I'd have said that a course which introduces you to a broad range of languages is better than one which ties you into one language, even if that language was the industry standard in many areas. I mean, lots of languages share a set of similar conventions, but no one language is sufficient to introduce you to all of them. You simply cannot guarantee that you will always work in the same language for your entire working life, and IMHO you're better getting experience with other languages when you're at university than when struggling to meet an unrealistic schedule in a real job.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After leaving university , I 've worked in 6 + different programming languages .
I 'd have said that a course which introduces you to a broad range of languages is better than one which ties you into one language , even if that language was the industry standard in many areas .
I mean , lots of languages share a set of similar conventions , but no one language is sufficient to introduce you to all of them .
You simply can not guarantee that you will always work in the same language for your entire working life , and IMHO you 're better getting experience with other languages when you 're at university than when struggling to meet an unrealistic schedule in a real job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After leaving university, I've worked in 6+ different programming languages.
I'd have said that a course which introduces you to a broad range of languages is better than one which ties you into one language, even if that language was the industry standard in many areas.
I mean, lots of languages share a set of similar conventions, but no one language is sufficient to introduce you to all of them.
You simply cannot guarantee that you will always work in the same language for your entire working life, and IMHO you're better getting experience with other languages when you're at university than when struggling to meet an unrealistic schedule in a real job.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669139</id>
	<title>Re:Go to a "trade school" for that. Not a universi</title>
	<author>0xdeadbeef</author>
	<datestamp>1247430840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>They should teach math instead.</i></p><p>Good god, man, have you seen a mathematician's code? It's worse than that of electrical engineers!</p><p>Programming is a craft, and it requires study, it requires practice, and it requires a holistic perspective. It is more akin to architecture than mathematics, despite the fact that is so heavily reliant on mathematical theory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They should teach math instead.Good god , man , have you seen a mathematician 's code ?
It 's worse than that of electrical engineers ! Programming is a craft , and it requires study , it requires practice , and it requires a holistic perspective .
It is more akin to architecture than mathematics , despite the fact that is so heavily reliant on mathematical theory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should teach math instead.Good god, man, have you seen a mathematician's code?
It's worse than that of electrical engineers!Programming is a craft, and it requires study, it requires practice, and it requires a holistic perspective.
It is more akin to architecture than mathematics, despite the fact that is so heavily reliant on mathematical theory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669035</id>
	<title>Re:Too dumb to realize new school is better</title>
	<author>japhering</author>
	<datestamp>1247430000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>New school teaches every language + programmming concepts and our poster complains - maybe the new gen kids are unteachable.</p></div></blockquote><p>Or just part of generation that has been taught the fine art of regurgitation rather than the more complex how to think,  as well as being rewarded for every little thing they did right along the way.</p><p>Either way it doesn't matter, as somewhere between 30 and 50 you will run head on into the ageism that is so rampant in the technology industries.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>New school teaches every language + programmming concepts and our poster complains - maybe the new gen kids are unteachable.Or just part of generation that has been taught the fine art of regurgitation rather than the more complex how to think , as well as being rewarded for every little thing they did right along the way.Either way it does n't matter , as somewhere between 30 and 50 you will run head on into the ageism that is so rampant in the technology industries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New school teaches every language + programmming concepts and our poster complains - maybe the new gen kids are unteachable.Or just part of generation that has been taught the fine art of regurgitation rather than the more complex how to think,  as well as being rewarded for every little thing they did right along the way.Either way it doesn't matter, as somewhere between 30 and 50 you will run head on into the ageism that is so rampant in the technology industries.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670021</id>
	<title>Re:Too dumb to realize new school is better</title>
	<author>story645</author>
	<datestamp>1247394660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>New school teaches every language + programmming concepts and our poster complains - maybe the new gen kids are unteachable.</p></div><p> I'm probably new gen (ripe old age of 21) and I think new school rocks. My school attempts a theory/practical balance by giving classes in basically one or the other and just putting an about equal amount of each in the core and fails miserably at teaching anyone not already interested in comp sci anything 'cause most of the ones just in school for a job take the practical courses where they can cut+paste their way to a half decent grade. (The best were the guys who've worked in industry but don't know any concepts.) This guy's just a newbie if he doesn't get that buy learning the concepts, a lot of the more complicated parts of any language become more accessible. I've seen the "language for resume" attitude from plenty of guys in my classes 10/20 years my senior (public school and all that) and complaints about the lack of conceptual knowledge from guys my age and younger. Interest to actually learn comp sci has to do with attitude, not age.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>New school teaches every language + programmming concepts and our poster complains - maybe the new gen kids are unteachable .
I 'm probably new gen ( ripe old age of 21 ) and I think new school rocks .
My school attempts a theory/practical balance by giving classes in basically one or the other and just putting an about equal amount of each in the core and fails miserably at teaching anyone not already interested in comp sci anything 'cause most of the ones just in school for a job take the practical courses where they can cut + paste their way to a half decent grade .
( The best were the guys who 've worked in industry but do n't know any concepts .
) This guy 's just a newbie if he does n't get that buy learning the concepts , a lot of the more complicated parts of any language become more accessible .
I 've seen the " language for resume " attitude from plenty of guys in my classes 10/20 years my senior ( public school and all that ) and complaints about the lack of conceptual knowledge from guys my age and younger .
Interest to actually learn comp sci has to do with attitude , not age .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New school teaches every language + programmming concepts and our poster complains - maybe the new gen kids are unteachable.
I'm probably new gen (ripe old age of 21) and I think new school rocks.
My school attempts a theory/practical balance by giving classes in basically one or the other and just putting an about equal amount of each in the core and fails miserably at teaching anyone not already interested in comp sci anything 'cause most of the ones just in school for a job take the practical courses where they can cut+paste their way to a half decent grade.
(The best were the guys who've worked in industry but don't know any concepts.
) This guy's just a newbie if he doesn't get that buy learning the concepts, a lot of the more complicated parts of any language become more accessible.
I've seen the "language for resume" attitude from plenty of guys in my classes 10/20 years my senior (public school and all that) and complaints about the lack of conceptual knowledge from guys my age and younger.
Interest to actually learn comp sci has to do with attitude, not age.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247429880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed.  Programming concepts are far more important than any particular language.  It's important to understand at more than one programming paradigm:  object-oriented programming is the paradigm de jure (C++, Java, C#, Python), but also understand a traditional imperative structured approach (C,  Bash) and a functional approach (Lisp, Scheme) as well.  Note that these languages are only examples:  Python is actually a mixed-paradigm language that supports imperative structured programming and functional programming in addition to OOP, for instance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
Programming concepts are far more important than any particular language .
It 's important to understand at more than one programming paradigm : object-oriented programming is the paradigm de jure ( C + + , Java , C # , Python ) , but also understand a traditional imperative structured approach ( C , Bash ) and a functional approach ( Lisp , Scheme ) as well .
Note that these languages are only examples : Python is actually a mixed-paradigm language that supports imperative structured programming and functional programming in addition to OOP , for instance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
Programming concepts are far more important than any particular language.
It's important to understand at more than one programming paradigm:  object-oriented programming is the paradigm de jure (C++, Java, C#, Python), but also understand a traditional imperative structured approach (C,  Bash) and a functional approach (Lisp, Scheme) as well.
Note that these languages are only examples:  Python is actually a mixed-paradigm language that supports imperative structured programming and functional programming in addition to OOP, for instance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669217</id>
	<title>It doesn't matter what language they teach</title>
	<author>macbeth66</author>
	<datestamp>1247431620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They should be teaching you how to think.  How to take requirements and turn them into a finished product.  After all, you are going to school for a CS degree.  Not Management.  Not Business.  Not Math.  Not Physics.  But, Computers.</p><p>You need to understand the problem, break it down into manageable components and develop a plan.  Take that plan and design a solution.  Code that solution.  Debug that solution.  Design that solution.  Code that solution.  Debug that solution.  Design that solution.  And so on.</p><p>Note that I did not mention an language, a discipline or an industry.  It applies to building a payroll system to a new gene sequencer.</p><p>I can't stand the grads that I have seen in the past ten years.  They KNOW everything.  They know JAVA.  They can not dissemble a problem into workable, manageable parts.  They can not read.  They can not write.  Schools need to get back to the basics and teach the student how to survive in the real world.</p><p>I don't give a crap about Oracle or Python, as next week, I might have to use MySQL and C#.</p><p>So far, in the past three years, I have used all of them, and then some.  However, I have never used Java beyond learning it.  Knowing that, I would still learn it.  It gave me a different perspective on things I still do today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They should be teaching you how to think .
How to take requirements and turn them into a finished product .
After all , you are going to school for a CS degree .
Not Management .
Not Business .
Not Math .
Not Physics .
But , Computers.You need to understand the problem , break it down into manageable components and develop a plan .
Take that plan and design a solution .
Code that solution .
Debug that solution .
Design that solution .
Code that solution .
Debug that solution .
Design that solution .
And so on.Note that I did not mention an language , a discipline or an industry .
It applies to building a payroll system to a new gene sequencer.I ca n't stand the grads that I have seen in the past ten years .
They KNOW everything .
They know JAVA .
They can not dissemble a problem into workable , manageable parts .
They can not read .
They can not write .
Schools need to get back to the basics and teach the student how to survive in the real world.I do n't give a crap about Oracle or Python , as next week , I might have to use MySQL and C # .So far , in the past three years , I have used all of them , and then some .
However , I have never used Java beyond learning it .
Knowing that , I would still learn it .
It gave me a different perspective on things I still do today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should be teaching you how to think.
How to take requirements and turn them into a finished product.
After all, you are going to school for a CS degree.
Not Management.
Not Business.
Not Math.
Not Physics.
But, Computers.You need to understand the problem, break it down into manageable components and develop a plan.
Take that plan and design a solution.
Code that solution.
Debug that solution.
Design that solution.
Code that solution.
Debug that solution.
Design that solution.
And so on.Note that I did not mention an language, a discipline or an industry.
It applies to building a payroll system to a new gene sequencer.I can't stand the grads that I have seen in the past ten years.
They KNOW everything.
They know JAVA.
They can not dissemble a problem into workable, manageable parts.
They can not read.
They can not write.
Schools need to get back to the basics and teach the student how to survive in the real world.I don't give a crap about Oracle or Python, as next week, I might have to use MySQL and C#.So far, in the past three years, I have used all of them, and then some.
However, I have never used Java beyond learning it.
Knowing that, I would still learn it.
It gave me a different perspective on things I still do today.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669807</id>
	<title>My suggestion...</title>
	<author>yoursurrogategod</author>
	<datestamp>1247393340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd say Python.

I grew up on C++ and Java.  VB<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET was the next step.  At the moment I'm infatuated with Erlang.  I've dabbled in Python, but ever since I discovered Erlang I dropped it.

Python is a nice way to start things off.  It's very powerful and yet very easy to build simple applications.  It's great to learn new stuff in and has plenty of reference material online and in stores.

I'd recommend you pick something up that teaches you about parallel processing (Erlang or just general message queuing systems.)  The reason being is that with even more cores, this will be the next big problem to overcome (on a daily basis) in computing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd say Python .
I grew up on C + + and Java .
VB .NET was the next step .
At the moment I 'm infatuated with Erlang .
I 've dabbled in Python , but ever since I discovered Erlang I dropped it .
Python is a nice way to start things off .
It 's very powerful and yet very easy to build simple applications .
It 's great to learn new stuff in and has plenty of reference material online and in stores .
I 'd recommend you pick something up that teaches you about parallel processing ( Erlang or just general message queuing systems .
) The reason being is that with even more cores , this will be the next big problem to overcome ( on a daily basis ) in computing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd say Python.
I grew up on C++ and Java.
VB .NET was the next step.
At the moment I'm infatuated with Erlang.
I've dabbled in Python, but ever since I discovered Erlang I dropped it.
Python is a nice way to start things off.
It's very powerful and yet very easy to build simple applications.
It's great to learn new stuff in and has plenty of reference material online and in stores.
I'd recommend you pick something up that teaches you about parallel processing (Erlang or just general message queuing systems.
)  The reason being is that with even more cores, this will be the next big problem to overcome (on a daily basis) in computing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28683819</id>
	<title>Re:C# and Bing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247485500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>never ceases the constant<br>flow of lies coming from Redmond</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>never ceases the constantflow of lies coming from Redmond</tokentext>
<sentencetext>never ceases the constantflow of lies coming from Redmond</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670377</id>
	<title>Best language to learn to get a job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247397780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You might want to consider Hindi, Urdu, or Mandarin. I assume you are willing to relocate to where all the programming jobs are located...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You might want to consider Hindi , Urdu , or Mandarin .
I assume you are willing to relocate to where all the programming jobs are located.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might want to consider Hindi, Urdu, or Mandarin.
I assume you are willing to relocate to where all the programming jobs are located...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669203</id>
	<title>Find another major</title>
	<author>planetoid</author>
	<datestamp>1247431440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Take it from me, a computer science degree definitely won't help you get a job.<br><br>Major in something whose industry actually has entry-level job openings.  The only computer science jobs out there all say "Minimum 5-8 years industry experience required, must be proficient in Java, SOAP, XML, XHTML, SHTML, ZHTML, ABCDEFGHTMLIJKLMNOP, ORACLE, MYSQL, SQL SERVER, JAVASCRIPT, WEB 3.0 TECHNOLOGIES," and other things that are the complete opposite of what you found interesting and intellectually stimulating about computer science when you enrolled.<br><br>Unless you actually like hopping on the WEB! WEB! WEB! bandwagon, in that case then go for it.  Otherwise a computer science major is only good for knowing how to better work on your hobby projects in your free time while your actual income ends up being working minimum wage as a cashier at Safeway.<br><br>Fuck...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Take it from me , a computer science degree definitely wo n't help you get a job.Major in something whose industry actually has entry-level job openings .
The only computer science jobs out there all say " Minimum 5-8 years industry experience required , must be proficient in Java , SOAP , XML , XHTML , SHTML , ZHTML , ABCDEFGHTMLIJKLMNOP , ORACLE , MYSQL , SQL SERVER , JAVASCRIPT , WEB 3.0 TECHNOLOGIES , " and other things that are the complete opposite of what you found interesting and intellectually stimulating about computer science when you enrolled.Unless you actually like hopping on the WEB !
WEB ! WEB !
bandwagon , in that case then go for it .
Otherwise a computer science major is only good for knowing how to better work on your hobby projects in your free time while your actual income ends up being working minimum wage as a cashier at Safeway.Fuck.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take it from me, a computer science degree definitely won't help you get a job.Major in something whose industry actually has entry-level job openings.
The only computer science jobs out there all say "Minimum 5-8 years industry experience required, must be proficient in Java, SOAP, XML, XHTML, SHTML, ZHTML, ABCDEFGHTMLIJKLMNOP, ORACLE, MYSQL, SQL SERVER, JAVASCRIPT, WEB 3.0 TECHNOLOGIES," and other things that are the complete opposite of what you found interesting and intellectually stimulating about computer science when you enrolled.Unless you actually like hopping on the WEB!
WEB! WEB!
bandwagon, in that case then go for it.
Otherwise a computer science major is only good for knowing how to better work on your hobby projects in your free time while your actual income ends up being working minimum wage as a cashier at Safeway.Fuck...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675267</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>morgan\_greywolf</author>
	<datestamp>1247495520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I answered this a few months ago on another post. I'll just link to my old post so you guys can follow the links [slashdot.org], but I copied and pasted it below. Languages to know are C/C++ and Java, everything else is derivative.</p></div><p>I wouldn't refer to Python, Perl, Ruby, Lua, or any of the other dynamic languages as 'derivative' of C/C++ or Java.  C/C++ and Java are static-typed languages, while the dynamic languages are dynamically-typed, for instance.  Also, Python classes only vaguely resemble C++ classes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I answered this a few months ago on another post .
I 'll just link to my old post so you guys can follow the links [ slashdot.org ] , but I copied and pasted it below .
Languages to know are C/C + + and Java , everything else is derivative.I would n't refer to Python , Perl , Ruby , Lua , or any of the other dynamic languages as 'derivative ' of C/C + + or Java .
C/C + + and Java are static-typed languages , while the dynamic languages are dynamically-typed , for instance .
Also , Python classes only vaguely resemble C + + classes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I answered this a few months ago on another post.
I'll just link to my old post so you guys can follow the links [slashdot.org], but I copied and pasted it below.
Languages to know are C/C++ and Java, everything else is derivative.I wouldn't refer to Python, Perl, Ruby, Lua, or any of the other dynamic languages as 'derivative' of C/C++ or Java.
C/C++ and Java are static-typed languages, while the dynamic languages are dynamically-typed, for instance.
Also, Python classes only vaguely resemble C++ classes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671801</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669863</id>
	<title>A lot of heat, not much light, as usual</title>
	<author>Informative</author>
	<datestamp>1247393640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><br>
Short term: look at you local job ads
<br>
Long term: read Knuth</htmltext>
<tokenext>Short term : look at you local job ads Long term : read Knuth</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Short term: look at you local job ads

Long term: read Knuth</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669723</id>
	<title>learn the concepts</title>
	<author>cyn1c77</author>
	<datestamp>1247392680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While I feel that it would be nice to get a well-rounded introduction to the programming world, I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job.


</p><p>It sounds like you enrolled in a better school the second time around. </p><p>Ideally, school should teach you the nuances of each language and all the conpcets, but there is limited time.  Learning how to program in one language will make you  just make you a code-monkey if you don't learn how to extend the programming concepts to other languages and projects.  Learning the programming concepts and a number of languages will send you on the path to be a computer scientist and teach you the basics of a number of languages.  Personally, I feel that you can easily learn syntax yourself with a compiler and a book.  It takes more mental effort and motivation to learn the larger-scale concepts, so it is better to learn these in class.  </p><p>So you really need to decide what you want to be:  a programmer or a computer scientist.  </p><p>From your employer's perspective, anyone fresh out of school is going to be pretty useless at first.  You have no corporate work experience and probably limited experience working with a team.  But just think what would be more embarrassing to you as a new employee?  Would you rather admit to your boss that you don't know the proper syntax for an if statement in Java or that you never fully worked out what a three-dimensional array was?   </p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I feel that it would be nice to get a well-rounded introduction to the programming world , I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job .
It sounds like you enrolled in a better school the second time around .
Ideally , school should teach you the nuances of each language and all the conpcets , but there is limited time .
Learning how to program in one language will make you just make you a code-monkey if you do n't learn how to extend the programming concepts to other languages and projects .
Learning the programming concepts and a number of languages will send you on the path to be a computer scientist and teach you the basics of a number of languages .
Personally , I feel that you can easily learn syntax yourself with a compiler and a book .
It takes more mental effort and motivation to learn the larger-scale concepts , so it is better to learn these in class .
So you really need to decide what you want to be : a programmer or a computer scientist .
From your employer 's perspective , anyone fresh out of school is going to be pretty useless at first .
You have no corporate work experience and probably limited experience working with a team .
But just think what would be more embarrassing to you as a new employee ?
Would you rather admit to your boss that you do n't know the proper syntax for an if statement in Java or that you never fully worked out what a three-dimensional array was ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I feel that it would be nice to get a well-rounded introduction to the programming world, I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job.
It sounds like you enrolled in a better school the second time around.
Ideally, school should teach you the nuances of each language and all the conpcets, but there is limited time.
Learning how to program in one language will make you  just make you a code-monkey if you don't learn how to extend the programming concepts to other languages and projects.
Learning the programming concepts and a number of languages will send you on the path to be a computer scientist and teach you the basics of a number of languages.
Personally, I feel that you can easily learn syntax yourself with a compiler and a book.
It takes more mental effort and motivation to learn the larger-scale concepts, so it is better to learn these in class.
So you really need to decide what you want to be:  a programmer or a computer scientist.
From your employer's perspective, anyone fresh out of school is going to be pretty useless at first.
You have no corporate work experience and probably limited experience working with a team.
But just think what would be more embarrassing to you as a new employee?
Would you rather admit to your boss that you don't know the proper syntax for an if statement in Java or that you never fully worked out what a three-dimensional array was?   
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675253</id>
	<title>C++ or LISP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247495460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Learn C++ early on. I thought it was a mistake that in my college they over-simplified with java. I'd say as I am finishing up my degree, its annoying to not only have to learn high-level concepts, but also be bothered by trying simultaneously to get used to the syntax/concept of pointers (an &amp; and * should never be in a language... pressing shift takes time). Java's simplicity should be a luxury, not a way for profs at the low-level classes to have overly-abstracted courses. Other then C++, I'd say  LISP would be your best bet. Even though LISP has the simplest syntax, it's versatility makes it the best one to learn.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Learn C + + early on .
I thought it was a mistake that in my college they over-simplified with java .
I 'd say as I am finishing up my degree , its annoying to not only have to learn high-level concepts , but also be bothered by trying simultaneously to get used to the syntax/concept of pointers ( an &amp; and * should never be in a language... pressing shift takes time ) .
Java 's simplicity should be a luxury , not a way for profs at the low-level classes to have overly-abstracted courses .
Other then C + + , I 'd say LISP would be your best bet .
Even though LISP has the simplest syntax , it 's versatility makes it the best one to learn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Learn C++ early on.
I thought it was a mistake that in my college they over-simplified with java.
I'd say as I am finishing up my degree, its annoying to not only have to learn high-level concepts, but also be bothered by trying simultaneously to get used to the syntax/concept of pointers (an &amp; and * should never be in a language... pressing shift takes time).
Java's simplicity should be a luxury, not a way for profs at the low-level classes to have overly-abstracted courses.
Other then C++, I'd say  LISP would be your best bet.
Even though LISP has the simplest syntax, it's versatility makes it the best one to learn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671629</id>
	<title>Re:Go with the way your new school does it.</title>
	<author>SimonInOz</author>
	<datestamp>1247409540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, if only that were true.</p><p>I finished my degree in 1976. (Yes Timothy, there WERE computers then). It covered countless languages and taught concepts well. (Thanks Essex University, you served me well).</p><p>Since then I've worked in a wide variety of environments and languages.</p><p>But I am having no fun trying to get a job in the current (miserable) environment - yes I know that was bad timing on my part. (I'm in Sydney Australia, where we are not suffering especially badly with the GFC in general).<br>Employers seek a check list of experience in very specific areas - their ads specifically state things like "must have 5 years in J2EE", "must have 3 years JavaScript" and so on.</p><p>And if you do not, then they skip your resume and go on to the next - they even have little pop quizzes to see if you remember stupidly obscure syntactic tricks.<br>None of them seem interested to find if you can actually think.<br>Only "experience" - not ability. It's weird. And dispiriting.</p><p>Perhaps it is different hiring graduate students (if indeed, any are being hired at the moment) - but I doubt it.</p><p>I despair a little - it's a bit like judging peoples work performance on how many hours they work<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... seems logical (and would probably work for shovelling coal, say), but is utterly wrong in this industry.</p><p>Oh, and if anyone in Sydney want an architect/analyst/programmer who can think - and is familiar with a dozen languages - I'm available.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , if only that were true.I finished my degree in 1976 .
( Yes Timothy , there WERE computers then ) .
It covered countless languages and taught concepts well .
( Thanks Essex University , you served me well ) .Since then I 've worked in a wide variety of environments and languages.But I am having no fun trying to get a job in the current ( miserable ) environment - yes I know that was bad timing on my part .
( I 'm in Sydney Australia , where we are not suffering especially badly with the GFC in general ) .Employers seek a check list of experience in very specific areas - their ads specifically state things like " must have 5 years in J2EE " , " must have 3 years JavaScript " and so on.And if you do not , then they skip your resume and go on to the next - they even have little pop quizzes to see if you remember stupidly obscure syntactic tricks.None of them seem interested to find if you can actually think.Only " experience " - not ability .
It 's weird .
And dispiriting.Perhaps it is different hiring graduate students ( if indeed , any are being hired at the moment ) - but I doubt it.I despair a little - it 's a bit like judging peoples work performance on how many hours they work ... seems logical ( and would probably work for shovelling coal , say ) , but is utterly wrong in this industry.Oh , and if anyone in Sydney want an architect/analyst/programmer who can think - and is familiar with a dozen languages - I 'm available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, if only that were true.I finished my degree in 1976.
(Yes Timothy, there WERE computers then).
It covered countless languages and taught concepts well.
(Thanks Essex University, you served me well).Since then I've worked in a wide variety of environments and languages.But I am having no fun trying to get a job in the current (miserable) environment - yes I know that was bad timing on my part.
(I'm in Sydney Australia, where we are not suffering especially badly with the GFC in general).Employers seek a check list of experience in very specific areas - their ads specifically state things like "must have 5 years in J2EE", "must have 3 years JavaScript" and so on.And if you do not, then they skip your resume and go on to the next - they even have little pop quizzes to see if you remember stupidly obscure syntactic tricks.None of them seem interested to find if you can actually think.Only "experience" - not ability.
It's weird.
And dispiriting.Perhaps it is different hiring graduate students (if indeed, any are being hired at the moment) - but I doubt it.I despair a little - it's a bit like judging peoples work performance on how many hours they work ... seems logical (and would probably work for shovelling coal, say), but is utterly wrong in this industry.Oh, and if anyone in Sydney want an architect/analyst/programmer who can think - and is familiar with a dozen languages - I'm available.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668957</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669123</id>
	<title>Marklar001</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247430780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Whatever specifics you learn at university will be out of date by the time you start work, and will be a hindrance five years later. You need to get the generalisations so that you can build on what you learn. Learning is about increasing your horizons, not narrowing them.

Give a man a fish, and he'll be fed for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll be fed for a week until everyone else who can fish deplete the resources. Tech him a concept of fishery management and he'll feed the world forever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whatever specifics you learn at university will be out of date by the time you start work , and will be a hindrance five years later .
You need to get the generalisations so that you can build on what you learn .
Learning is about increasing your horizons , not narrowing them .
Give a man a fish , and he 'll be fed for a day , teach a man to fish and he 'll be fed for a week until everyone else who can fish deplete the resources .
Tech him a concept of fishery management and he 'll feed the world forever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whatever specifics you learn at university will be out of date by the time you start work, and will be a hindrance five years later.
You need to get the generalisations so that you can build on what you learn.
Learning is about increasing your horizons, not narrowing them.
Give a man a fish, and he'll be fed for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll be fed for a week until everyone else who can fish deplete the resources.
Tech him a concept of fishery management and he'll feed the world forever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672221</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong Focus</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247415540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, don't weed out those who can't think logically!</p><p>After all, some giant changes in programming concepts can come from those who are illogical.</p><p>(Sure 99\% of those who can't will shortly realize they are unemployable in the business, but that 1\% could be useful.)</p><p>But I'd say we don't need more programmers, we need more tech support engineers, to read scripts to the victims of bad coding.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , do n't weed out those who ca n't think logically ! After all , some giant changes in programming concepts can come from those who are illogical .
( Sure 99 \ % of those who ca n't will shortly realize they are unemployable in the business , but that 1 \ % could be useful .
) But I 'd say we do n't need more programmers , we need more tech support engineers , to read scripts to the victims of bad coding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, don't weed out those who can't think logically!After all, some giant changes in programming concepts can come from those who are illogical.
(Sure 99\% of those who can't will shortly realize they are unemployable in the business, but that 1\% could be useful.
)But I'd say we don't need more programmers, we need more tech support engineers, to read scripts to the victims of bad coding.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669011</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28679343</id>
	<title>From my personal experience</title>
	<author>Nazeer++</author>
	<datestamp>1247510160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hi there,

What I have learnt from my personal experience is that a Computer Programmer is the compound of programmer, graphic artist, data librarian, psychologist, manager &amp; technical writer.<br> <br>

Main skills to acquire are solid concepts of Data Structures like Binary Tree, Stack, Heaps etc. Algorithms, solid programming concepts. Some personal skills required are innovation, determination, team player and thinking out of the box.<br> <br>

The best languages to start getting all the datastructures and algorithms into your bones is C &amp; C++. Then once you have mastered all this then you should try to be innovative and apply these acquired skills to real world application.<br> <br>

During my university years, I was taught all languages from Assembly to COBOL, C to Java. But, I only took one language seriously and applied all my concepts in it and graduated. I used to do several softwares just for fun and ended up earning money out of them to support my studies. The projects I still remember were Chess game, Net Sniffer, Customized Compiler (I called it Nazeer++<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) ), Online Banking System and a lot others.<br> <br>

I read in the thread that you should also learn SQL, well you must learn SQL as there is no business application that doesn't do data manipulation.<br> <br>

What I recommend is, gather some of your college mates with similar interests as yours then start working together on a project. Do everything as it should be done. Do proper documentation, analysis, timelines &amp; stuff and start cracking on with it. Get to the bottom of every detail untill you can see the electrons flowing through your hardware.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<br> <br>

Cheers,<br>
Mo</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi there , What I have learnt from my personal experience is that a Computer Programmer is the compound of programmer , graphic artist , data librarian , psychologist , manager &amp; technical writer .
Main skills to acquire are solid concepts of Data Structures like Binary Tree , Stack , Heaps etc .
Algorithms , solid programming concepts .
Some personal skills required are innovation , determination , team player and thinking out of the box .
The best languages to start getting all the datastructures and algorithms into your bones is C &amp; C + + .
Then once you have mastered all this then you should try to be innovative and apply these acquired skills to real world application .
During my university years , I was taught all languages from Assembly to COBOL , C to Java .
But , I only took one language seriously and applied all my concepts in it and graduated .
I used to do several softwares just for fun and ended up earning money out of them to support my studies .
The projects I still remember were Chess game , Net Sniffer , Customized Compiler ( I called it Nazeer + + : ) ) , Online Banking System and a lot others .
I read in the thread that you should also learn SQL , well you must learn SQL as there is no business application that does n't do data manipulation .
What I recommend is , gather some of your college mates with similar interests as yours then start working together on a project .
Do everything as it should be done .
Do proper documentation , analysis , timelines &amp; stuff and start cracking on with it .
Get to the bottom of every detail untill you can see the electrons flowing through your hardware .
: ) Cheers , Mo</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi there,

What I have learnt from my personal experience is that a Computer Programmer is the compound of programmer, graphic artist, data librarian, psychologist, manager &amp; technical writer.
Main skills to acquire are solid concepts of Data Structures like Binary Tree, Stack, Heaps etc.
Algorithms, solid programming concepts.
Some personal skills required are innovation, determination, team player and thinking out of the box.
The best languages to start getting all the datastructures and algorithms into your bones is C &amp; C++.
Then once you have mastered all this then you should try to be innovative and apply these acquired skills to real world application.
During my university years, I was taught all languages from Assembly to COBOL, C to Java.
But, I only took one language seriously and applied all my concepts in it and graduated.
I used to do several softwares just for fun and ended up earning money out of them to support my studies.
The projects I still remember were Chess game, Net Sniffer, Customized Compiler (I called it Nazeer++ :) ), Online Banking System and a lot others.
I read in the thread that you should also learn SQL, well you must learn SQL as there is no business application that doesn't do data manipulation.
What I recommend is, gather some of your college mates with similar interests as yours then start working together on a project.
Do everything as it should be done.
Do proper documentation, analysis, timelines &amp; stuff and start cracking on with it.
Get to the bottom of every detail untill you can see the electrons flowing through your hardware.
:) 

Cheers,
Mo</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670069</id>
	<title>my perspective.</title>
	<author>jonnyuk</author>
	<datestamp>1247395020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have just finished my first year of CS at uni, i know people across the spectrum from oxbridge to old polytechnics like myslef and it seems most places are teaching theory behind programming in a single language and then once the basics are in the mind my uni expands the teachine quite rapidly by inserting heskel, C variations and ruby. From what i've found if you can programm in one language u can program in any, its just a case of learning syntax. Its all based on logic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have just finished my first year of CS at uni , i know people across the spectrum from oxbridge to old polytechnics like myslef and it seems most places are teaching theory behind programming in a single language and then once the basics are in the mind my uni expands the teachine quite rapidly by inserting heskel , C variations and ruby .
From what i 've found if you can programm in one language u can program in any , its just a case of learning syntax .
Its all based on logic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have just finished my first year of CS at uni, i know people across the spectrum from oxbridge to old polytechnics like myslef and it seems most places are teaching theory behind programming in a single language and then once the basics are in the mind my uni expands the teachine quite rapidly by inserting heskel, C variations and ruby.
From what i've found if you can programm in one language u can program in any, its just a case of learning syntax.
Its all based on logic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676161</id>
	<title>Sounds Like a Good Program</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247499480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I myself graduated from a similar program at Indiana University.  It has served me well.  When I first graduated I felt like you said.  I was Unsure of whether the concept and theory would translate into something useable in a real world project.  It did.</p><p>One of the most useful courses I took in college was one called Programming Languages.  It was a 300 level course that attempted to explain the way programming language are implemented behind the scenes.  We used Scheme (a lisp based language).  Using Scheme, we were able to implement a variety of other languages.  For one project in the course we implemented a scheme interpreter inside scheme, then translated the code via some formalized transforms into C code.  This meant that at the end of the course we had written the core of a scheme interpreter in C.</p><p>After a course like this you should have no problem picking up whatever language you need for a job.  You will start to see how with a little massaging they are functionally equivalent.</p><p>Just don't tell them you don't know a given language in an interview.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I myself graduated from a similar program at Indiana University .
It has served me well .
When I first graduated I felt like you said .
I was Unsure of whether the concept and theory would translate into something useable in a real world project .
It did.One of the most useful courses I took in college was one called Programming Languages .
It was a 300 level course that attempted to explain the way programming language are implemented behind the scenes .
We used Scheme ( a lisp based language ) .
Using Scheme , we were able to implement a variety of other languages .
For one project in the course we implemented a scheme interpreter inside scheme , then translated the code via some formalized transforms into C code .
This meant that at the end of the course we had written the core of a scheme interpreter in C.After a course like this you should have no problem picking up whatever language you need for a job .
You will start to see how with a little massaging they are functionally equivalent.Just do n't tell them you do n't know a given language in an interview .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I myself graduated from a similar program at Indiana University.
It has served me well.
When I first graduated I felt like you said.
I was Unsure of whether the concept and theory would translate into something useable in a real world project.
It did.One of the most useful courses I took in college was one called Programming Languages.
It was a 300 level course that attempted to explain the way programming language are implemented behind the scenes.
We used Scheme (a lisp based language).
Using Scheme, we were able to implement a variety of other languages.
For one project in the course we implemented a scheme interpreter inside scheme, then translated the code via some formalized transforms into C code.
This meant that at the end of the course we had written the core of a scheme interpreter in C.After a course like this you should have no problem picking up whatever language you need for a job.
You will start to see how with a little massaging they are functionally equivalent.Just don't tell them you don't know a given language in an interview.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247402880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>If there is a single language that is not taught enough for real world experience, it's SQL. Just about any business programming job is going to involve storing and reporting on data. While a CS degree is going to give you a basic introduction to SQL, I feel that SQL should be introduced earlier and worked into more of the assignments you are asked to write.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If there is a single language that is not taught enough for real world experience , it 's SQL .
Just about any business programming job is going to involve storing and reporting on data .
While a CS degree is going to give you a basic introduction to SQL , I feel that SQL should be introduced earlier and worked into more of the assignments you are asked to write .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there is a single language that is not taught enough for real world experience, it's SQL.
Just about any business programming job is going to involve storing and reporting on data.
While a CS degree is going to give you a basic introduction to SQL, I feel that SQL should be introduced earlier and worked into more of the assignments you are asked to write.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670305</id>
	<title>Method Acting</title>
	<author>trydk</author>
	<datestamp>1247397180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is probably a rehash (pun intended<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-) of other people's answers, but all the same, I cannot help myself<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>
<br>
My best programming work is done in a drawing application like Inkscape or Visio.<br>
<br>
Long before the first line of code is committed to the harddisk, I have (bar for the simplest of programs) made one or more drawings depicting the interrelations between the modules of the program I am making. Not only does this ensure a modular approach to the problem solving, but it also gives a nice documentation to present to other people. With a bit of verbal grease (knowing me, people would probably say: verbiage), it often makes it possible for me to explain to non-technical people, how the program is supposed to work and that I have ensured scalability, usability<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... or whatever other -ability the customer wants.<br>
<br>
The selection of the actual program language for implementation comes later and is often based on other parameters, like Perl for quick (and often "dirty") solutions that need pattern matching, associative arrays and object orientation, PHP if the solution is not too heavy on pattern matching and associative arrays but is web-oriented, C (or C++ or C#) if I need a fast and efficient solution without (too much) pattern matching and associative arrays, COBOL for one of my customers, who uses no other language (oh yes, they DO exist!)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>
<br>
Sometimes the language is given by the customer, based on whatever capability the customer's organisation has. I honestly do not care. I can program in most major languages like {patting my shoulder} ALGOL, FORTRAN, COBOL, RPG, APL, Ada, COMAL, Simula, BASIC (that covered most of my teenage years and early twenties), assembler (IBM, x86, 6502, M6800, M68000, RCA1802,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... -- that covered some of my first grey hairs), Pascal, C, C++, C#, Java, JavaScript, Perl, PHP, Ruby, Python, and whatever languages I have forgotten (like FORTH, LISP and Prolog). Most of these languages (being functional) are basically the same with slightly different syntax and semantics. Some of the languages are radically different like FORTH (reverse Polish notation made into a programming language), LISP (List processing) and Prolog, where you basically tell the computer <em>what</em> you want, not <em>how</em> you want it done. (I cannot wait until quantum computers gives Prolog or a similar derivative a new lease of life.)<br>
<br>
So (at long last) the conclusion is: The method is much more important than the programming language. The more you know the better prepared you are for whatever an employer (or customer) may throw at you. And I cannot count the number of times I have created a quick proof of concept in Perl, only to have it programmed in some other language for actual implementation.<br>
<br>
Remember, programming <em>languages</em> can be taught, <em>programming</em> can <strong>not</strong>. (OK, do not flame me! I do know, some programming can be taught, but the most elegant and efficient programming is more akin to creating mathematical proofs or composing beautiful poems or painting stunning pictures, an <em>art</em>, not a <em>craft</em>!)</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is probably a rehash ( pun intended : - ) of other people 's answers , but all the same , I can not help myself .. . My best programming work is done in a drawing application like Inkscape or Visio .
Long before the first line of code is committed to the harddisk , I have ( bar for the simplest of programs ) made one or more drawings depicting the interrelations between the modules of the program I am making .
Not only does this ensure a modular approach to the problem solving , but it also gives a nice documentation to present to other people .
With a bit of verbal grease ( knowing me , people would probably say : verbiage ) , it often makes it possible for me to explain to non-technical people , how the program is supposed to work and that I have ensured scalability , usability ... or whatever other -ability the customer wants .
The selection of the actual program language for implementation comes later and is often based on other parameters , like Perl for quick ( and often " dirty " ) solutions that need pattern matching , associative arrays and object orientation , PHP if the solution is not too heavy on pattern matching and associative arrays but is web-oriented , C ( or C + + or C # ) if I need a fast and efficient solution without ( too much ) pattern matching and associative arrays , COBOL for one of my customers , who uses no other language ( oh yes , they DO exist !
) .. . Sometimes the language is given by the customer , based on whatever capability the customer 's organisation has .
I honestly do not care .
I can program in most major languages like { patting my shoulder } ALGOL , FORTRAN , COBOL , RPG , APL , Ada , COMAL , Simula , BASIC ( that covered most of my teenage years and early twenties ) , assembler ( IBM , x86 , 6502 , M6800 , M68000 , RCA1802 , ... -- that covered some of my first grey hairs ) , Pascal , C , C + + , C # , Java , JavaScript , Perl , PHP , Ruby , Python , and whatever languages I have forgotten ( like FORTH , LISP and Prolog ) .
Most of these languages ( being functional ) are basically the same with slightly different syntax and semantics .
Some of the languages are radically different like FORTH ( reverse Polish notation made into a programming language ) , LISP ( List processing ) and Prolog , where you basically tell the computer what you want , not how you want it done .
( I can not wait until quantum computers gives Prolog or a similar derivative a new lease of life .
) So ( at long last ) the conclusion is : The method is much more important than the programming language .
The more you know the better prepared you are for whatever an employer ( or customer ) may throw at you .
And I can not count the number of times I have created a quick proof of concept in Perl , only to have it programmed in some other language for actual implementation .
Remember , programming languages can be taught , programming can not .
( OK , do not flame me !
I do know , some programming can be taught , but the most elegant and efficient programming is more akin to creating mathematical proofs or composing beautiful poems or painting stunning pictures , an art , not a craft !
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is probably a rehash (pun intended :-) of other people's answers, but all the same, I cannot help myself ...

My best programming work is done in a drawing application like Inkscape or Visio.
Long before the first line of code is committed to the harddisk, I have (bar for the simplest of programs) made one or more drawings depicting the interrelations between the modules of the program I am making.
Not only does this ensure a modular approach to the problem solving, but it also gives a nice documentation to present to other people.
With a bit of verbal grease (knowing me, people would probably say: verbiage), it often makes it possible for me to explain to non-technical people, how the program is supposed to work and that I have ensured scalability, usability ... or whatever other -ability the customer wants.
The selection of the actual program language for implementation comes later and is often based on other parameters, like Perl for quick (and often "dirty") solutions that need pattern matching, associative arrays and object orientation, PHP if the solution is not too heavy on pattern matching and associative arrays but is web-oriented, C (or C++ or C#) if I need a fast and efficient solution without (too much) pattern matching and associative arrays, COBOL for one of my customers, who uses no other language (oh yes, they DO exist!
) ...

Sometimes the language is given by the customer, based on whatever capability the customer's organisation has.
I honestly do not care.
I can program in most major languages like {patting my shoulder} ALGOL, FORTRAN, COBOL, RPG, APL, Ada, COMAL, Simula, BASIC (that covered most of my teenage years and early twenties), assembler (IBM, x86, 6502, M6800, M68000, RCA1802, ... -- that covered some of my first grey hairs), Pascal, C, C++, C#, Java, JavaScript, Perl, PHP, Ruby, Python, and whatever languages I have forgotten (like FORTH, LISP and Prolog).
Most of these languages (being functional) are basically the same with slightly different syntax and semantics.
Some of the languages are radically different like FORTH (reverse Polish notation made into a programming language), LISP (List processing) and Prolog, where you basically tell the computer what you want, not how you want it done.
(I cannot wait until quantum computers gives Prolog or a similar derivative a new lease of life.
)

So (at long last) the conclusion is: The method is much more important than the programming language.
The more you know the better prepared you are for whatever an employer (or customer) may throw at you.
And I cannot count the number of times I have created a quick proof of concept in Perl, only to have it programmed in some other language for actual implementation.
Remember, programming languages can be taught, programming can not.
(OK, do not flame me!
I do know, some programming can be taught, but the most elegant and efficient programming is more akin to creating mathematical proofs or composing beautiful poems or painting stunning pictures, an art, not a craft!
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674937</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>spydum</author>
	<datestamp>1247493600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The real problem here, after reading many of the replies is that average programmers (who populate most of the software development teams nowadays), could give two licks about how a function works. They will use bubble-sort as long as it returns an ordered set, regardless of its efficiency for the better or the worse.

Developers have become dependent on faster hardware, and increasing resources to improve their code. There used to be a time when efficiency in programming was celebrated -- now it's all about meeting deadlines, and churning out lines of code. No concerns about how well the application runs or what kind of resources it consumes, unless it happens to break or not meet some metric in testing -- in which case, they just throw hardware or half-assed caching at the issue.

I see this every day, simple applications turned into bloated, inefficient code, and developers demanding "more memory" or "more and/or faster cpus" to reduce compute time. It's absurd. If they spent the proper time to streamline the apps, and gave thought as to how they were utilizing their clock cycles and memory allocations, we could cut our resource consumptions down significantly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The real problem here , after reading many of the replies is that average programmers ( who populate most of the software development teams nowadays ) , could give two licks about how a function works .
They will use bubble-sort as long as it returns an ordered set , regardless of its efficiency for the better or the worse .
Developers have become dependent on faster hardware , and increasing resources to improve their code .
There used to be a time when efficiency in programming was celebrated -- now it 's all about meeting deadlines , and churning out lines of code .
No concerns about how well the application runs or what kind of resources it consumes , unless it happens to break or not meet some metric in testing -- in which case , they just throw hardware or half-assed caching at the issue .
I see this every day , simple applications turned into bloated , inefficient code , and developers demanding " more memory " or " more and/or faster cpus " to reduce compute time .
It 's absurd .
If they spent the proper time to streamline the apps , and gave thought as to how they were utilizing their clock cycles and memory allocations , we could cut our resource consumptions down significantly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real problem here, after reading many of the replies is that average programmers (who populate most of the software development teams nowadays), could give two licks about how a function works.
They will use bubble-sort as long as it returns an ordered set, regardless of its efficiency for the better or the worse.
Developers have become dependent on faster hardware, and increasing resources to improve their code.
There used to be a time when efficiency in programming was celebrated -- now it's all about meeting deadlines, and churning out lines of code.
No concerns about how well the application runs or what kind of resources it consumes, unless it happens to break or not meet some metric in testing -- in which case, they just throw hardware or half-assed caching at the issue.
I see this every day, simple applications turned into bloated, inefficient code, and developers demanding "more memory" or "more and/or faster cpus" to reduce compute time.
It's absurd.
If they spent the proper time to streamline the apps, and gave thought as to how they were utilizing their clock cycles and memory allocations, we could cut our resource consumptions down significantly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669293</id>
	<title>I'd choose the variety</title>
	<author>Kirby</author>
	<datestamp>1247432340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're not going to come out of school with the expertise to be a professional software engineer in any case, whether you focus on one language or many.  It's a hard job, and 90\% of what makes it hard are factors of time longer than a quarter/semester, and factors of dealing with non-Computer Scientists and people with demands other than your professor.</p><p>It's okay, we (the hiring industry) know this, and a lot of us are willing to put in the investment to do the appropriate apprenticeships.  CS Degrees are one way to select people who are more likely to succeed, but it's a discipline that's only learned through doing for the most part, and best done with people who are more senior teaching you.  (I self-taught a lot after my CS degree, but I advanced more in the first year I had a real mentor than I did in the previous 6 I was doing it mostly myself.  But people do vary, and if you're the exception, great.)</p><p>I'd recommend the variety approach, because people \_do\_ vary.  Some people love the rigid structure of a Python, the massive infrastructure available to Java, the exposure of the bare metal of C, the total control of Assembly, the flexibility and rapid development of Perl, or whatever suits you.  At this stage: Try a lot!  Find a language you have fun with, and code more in that.  You'll be a lot happier with your job if you don't find the language you use every day to be high in however you define bullshit.  And if you don't fall in love with a particular approach, you've got a lot more starting nodes for your resume and can do a broader job search.</p><p>Employers have hired college students before, and we know that what you learn in your CS classes with respect to being a professional programmer is \_really\_ not that much, and hire more for people who we think will learn quickly, not be a pain in the ass, and actually have some amount of work discipline.  Whether someone took one or three C# classes is not very interesting.  (Personal side projects using the language of choice, those are more interesting.)</p><p>Good luck!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're not going to come out of school with the expertise to be a professional software engineer in any case , whether you focus on one language or many .
It 's a hard job , and 90 \ % of what makes it hard are factors of time longer than a quarter/semester , and factors of dealing with non-Computer Scientists and people with demands other than your professor.It 's okay , we ( the hiring industry ) know this , and a lot of us are willing to put in the investment to do the appropriate apprenticeships .
CS Degrees are one way to select people who are more likely to succeed , but it 's a discipline that 's only learned through doing for the most part , and best done with people who are more senior teaching you .
( I self-taught a lot after my CS degree , but I advanced more in the first year I had a real mentor than I did in the previous 6 I was doing it mostly myself .
But people do vary , and if you 're the exception , great .
) I 'd recommend the variety approach , because people \ _do \ _ vary .
Some people love the rigid structure of a Python , the massive infrastructure available to Java , the exposure of the bare metal of C , the total control of Assembly , the flexibility and rapid development of Perl , or whatever suits you .
At this stage : Try a lot !
Find a language you have fun with , and code more in that .
You 'll be a lot happier with your job if you do n't find the language you use every day to be high in however you define bullshit .
And if you do n't fall in love with a particular approach , you 've got a lot more starting nodes for your resume and can do a broader job search.Employers have hired college students before , and we know that what you learn in your CS classes with respect to being a professional programmer is \ _really \ _ not that much , and hire more for people who we think will learn quickly , not be a pain in the ass , and actually have some amount of work discipline .
Whether someone took one or three C # classes is not very interesting .
( Personal side projects using the language of choice , those are more interesting .
) Good luck !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're not going to come out of school with the expertise to be a professional software engineer in any case, whether you focus on one language or many.
It's a hard job, and 90\% of what makes it hard are factors of time longer than a quarter/semester, and factors of dealing with non-Computer Scientists and people with demands other than your professor.It's okay, we (the hiring industry) know this, and a lot of us are willing to put in the investment to do the appropriate apprenticeships.
CS Degrees are one way to select people who are more likely to succeed, but it's a discipline that's only learned through doing for the most part, and best done with people who are more senior teaching you.
(I self-taught a lot after my CS degree, but I advanced more in the first year I had a real mentor than I did in the previous 6 I was doing it mostly myself.
But people do vary, and if you're the exception, great.
)I'd recommend the variety approach, because people \_do\_ vary.
Some people love the rigid structure of a Python, the massive infrastructure available to Java, the exposure of the bare metal of C, the total control of Assembly, the flexibility and rapid development of Perl, or whatever suits you.
At this stage: Try a lot!
Find a language you have fun with, and code more in that.
You'll be a lot happier with your job if you don't find the language you use every day to be high in however you define bullshit.
And if you don't fall in love with a particular approach, you've got a lot more starting nodes for your resume and can do a broader job search.Employers have hired college students before, and we know that what you learn in your CS classes with respect to being a professional programmer is \_really\_ not that much, and hire more for people who we think will learn quickly, not be a pain in the ass, and actually have some amount of work discipline.
Whether someone took one or three C# classes is not very interesting.
(Personal side projects using the language of choice, those are more interesting.
)Good luck!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672311</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>cptdondo</author>
	<datestamp>1247416380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know, when I went to school they absolutely drilled us in bleeding edge techniques of the time.  On graduating, I found that it took fully 15 years for the commercial world to catch up to my progamming style.  (And, no the language is utterly irrelevant.)</p><p>Once OOP became common, I had to go and learn new concepts, only to find that they're really the old concepts.</p><p>There's only so many ways to do something.  How you express it is really a matter of choice and toolkit available.</p><p>Learn the concepts; forget the language.  Drill the theory, the ideas, the process, and allow the expression to come forth using whatever toolkit is current.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know , when I went to school they absolutely drilled us in bleeding edge techniques of the time .
On graduating , I found that it took fully 15 years for the commercial world to catch up to my progamming style .
( And , no the language is utterly irrelevant .
) Once OOP became common , I had to go and learn new concepts , only to find that they 're really the old concepts.There 's only so many ways to do something .
How you express it is really a matter of choice and toolkit available.Learn the concepts ; forget the language .
Drill the theory , the ideas , the process , and allow the expression to come forth using whatever toolkit is current .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know, when I went to school they absolutely drilled us in bleeding edge techniques of the time.
On graduating, I found that it took fully 15 years for the commercial world to catch up to my progamming style.
(And, no the language is utterly irrelevant.
)Once OOP became common, I had to go and learn new concepts, only to find that they're really the old concepts.There's only so many ways to do something.
How you express it is really a matter of choice and toolkit available.Learn the concepts; forget the language.
Drill the theory, the ideas, the process, and allow the expression to come forth using whatever toolkit is current.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672075</id>
	<title>what employers want</title>
	<author>cstacy</author>
	<datestamp>1247414040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>While I feel that it would be nice to get a well-rounded introduction to the programming world, I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job. After reading the syllabi, all the higher level classes appear to teach concepts rather than work to develop advanced techniques in a specific language. Which method of teaching is going to better provide me with the experience I need, as well as the experience an employer wants to see in a college graduate?"</p></div><p>Learning to program is not about specific languages - it's about those concepts.  You're supposed to be able to figure out how to program in any given language all by yourself, having learned the concepts.  The instruction they are giving you in particular languages is just to reinforce the concepts, and a little practice in using them.
</p><p>
If you can't figure out how to master the programming languages all by yourself, then you should not attempt a career as a computer programmer.
</p><p>
If you want to work as some low-level "coder" drone, probably using one language, then you don't need anything more than a high school education.  Rather than going to college, there are trade schools that can quickly certify you for that kind of work.  A few courses at a community college could also fulfill that.  Not sure I'd call it a "career", and you're not going to advance very much. I think there is still some demand for such people; not sure how much.  We don't hire people like that at my company or any of the companies I've personally worked for.  I did see some at one shop where I consulted about 10 years ago, though.  They were using Java.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I feel that it would be nice to get a well-rounded introduction to the programming world , I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job .
After reading the syllabi , all the higher level classes appear to teach concepts rather than work to develop advanced techniques in a specific language .
Which method of teaching is going to better provide me with the experience I need , as well as the experience an employer wants to see in a college graduate ?
" Learning to program is not about specific languages - it 's about those concepts .
You 're supposed to be able to figure out how to program in any given language all by yourself , having learned the concepts .
The instruction they are giving you in particular languages is just to reinforce the concepts , and a little practice in using them .
If you ca n't figure out how to master the programming languages all by yourself , then you should not attempt a career as a computer programmer .
If you want to work as some low-level " coder " drone , probably using one language , then you do n't need anything more than a high school education .
Rather than going to college , there are trade schools that can quickly certify you for that kind of work .
A few courses at a community college could also fulfill that .
Not sure I 'd call it a " career " , and you 're not going to advance very much .
I think there is still some demand for such people ; not sure how much .
We do n't hire people like that at my company or any of the companies I 've personally worked for .
I did see some at one shop where I consulted about 10 years ago , though .
They were using Java .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I feel that it would be nice to get a well-rounded introduction to the programming world, I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job.
After reading the syllabi, all the higher level classes appear to teach concepts rather than work to develop advanced techniques in a specific language.
Which method of teaching is going to better provide me with the experience I need, as well as the experience an employer wants to see in a college graduate?
"Learning to program is not about specific languages - it's about those concepts.
You're supposed to be able to figure out how to program in any given language all by yourself, having learned the concepts.
The instruction they are giving you in particular languages is just to reinforce the concepts, and a little practice in using them.
If you can't figure out how to master the programming languages all by yourself, then you should not attempt a career as a computer programmer.
If you want to work as some low-level "coder" drone, probably using one language, then you don't need anything more than a high school education.
Rather than going to college, there are trade schools that can quickly certify you for that kind of work.
A few courses at a community college could also fulfill that.
Not sure I'd call it a "career", and you're not going to advance very much.
I think there is still some demand for such people; not sure how much.
We don't hire people like that at my company or any of the companies I've personally worked for.
I did see some at one shop where I consulted about 10 years ago, though.
They were using Java.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668951</id>
	<title>Maybe you're the wrong place</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247429280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Despite what many believe, a CS degree is not about learning to program. A CS degree is about learning the theoretical and mathematical constructs that programming is based on.</p><p>If you know those basics, the language is largely irrelevant.</p><p>C is Pascal is Java is JavaScript is VB is C# is C++ - it's mostly syntactic sugar if you ignore the objects, and even the objects are similar. If you can't swap {} for () or begin-end or whatever, you have no hope of being a decent programmer.</p><p>If you're looking for vocational programming training, find a vocational school. It's that simple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Despite what many believe , a CS degree is not about learning to program .
A CS degree is about learning the theoretical and mathematical constructs that programming is based on.If you know those basics , the language is largely irrelevant.C is Pascal is Java is JavaScript is VB is C # is C + + - it 's mostly syntactic sugar if you ignore the objects , and even the objects are similar .
If you ca n't swap { } for ( ) or begin-end or whatever , you have no hope of being a decent programmer.If you 're looking for vocational programming training , find a vocational school .
It 's that simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Despite what many believe, a CS degree is not about learning to program.
A CS degree is about learning the theoretical and mathematical constructs that programming is based on.If you know those basics, the language is largely irrelevant.C is Pascal is Java is JavaScript is VB is C# is C++ - it's mostly syntactic sugar if you ignore the objects, and even the objects are similar.
If you can't swap {} for () or begin-end or whatever, you have no hope of being a decent programmer.If you're looking for vocational programming training, find a vocational school.
It's that simple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677929</id>
	<title>You think they teach you that in school?</title>
	<author>Shaiku</author>
	<datestamp>1247505480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you think you go to school to learn how to program/gain experience programming, then it's time for you to switch majors.

Broad exposure to several languages is the better system, IMO.  It's then all on you to take it home and gain the experience by practicing and also by studying other people's better code.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you think you go to school to learn how to program/gain experience programming , then it 's time for you to switch majors .
Broad exposure to several languages is the better system , IMO .
It 's then all on you to take it home and gain the experience by practicing and also by studying other people 's better code .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you think you go to school to learn how to program/gain experience programming, then it's time for you to switch majors.
Broad exposure to several languages is the better system, IMO.
It's then all on you to take it home and gain the experience by practicing and also by studying other people's better code.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671469</id>
	<title>Interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247408340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can you give some examples of algorithms that are patented?  Thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can you give some examples of algorithms that are patented ?
Thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can you give some examples of algorithms that are patented?
Thanks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670343</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670999</id>
	<title>Language is irrelevant</title>
	<author>American Expat</author>
	<datestamp>1247403720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>To quote my mentor back in the 1980's, "programming is prose, the language is just punctuation".<br> <br>


A few years ago, one of my junior guys was marveling at a hacked-together bash/sed/awk script that I threw together to do some testing, and asked how many programming languages I knew.  I thought about it for a while, and came up with over 20 languages that I have used professionally in my (25+ year) career.  Some I know to the depths of  their existence (Smalltalk, C++, Forth), some that I became fairly proficient in (assembler, Python, Lisp), and others just enough to debug and extend existing code (Fortran, Perl, APL).  Right now I probably couldn't punch out an off-the-cuff program in most of the languages I have worked in, but give me a couple hours to google the syntax and it will come back to me.<br> <br>


What's hard is understand what your program does, and why.  THAT is why you go to university.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>To quote my mentor back in the 1980 's , " programming is prose , the language is just punctuation " .
A few years ago , one of my junior guys was marveling at a hacked-together bash/sed/awk script that I threw together to do some testing , and asked how many programming languages I knew .
I thought about it for a while , and came up with over 20 languages that I have used professionally in my ( 25 + year ) career .
Some I know to the depths of their existence ( Smalltalk , C + + , Forth ) , some that I became fairly proficient in ( assembler , Python , Lisp ) , and others just enough to debug and extend existing code ( Fortran , Perl , APL ) .
Right now I probably could n't punch out an off-the-cuff program in most of the languages I have worked in , but give me a couple hours to google the syntax and it will come back to me .
What 's hard is understand what your program does , and why .
THAT is why you go to university .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To quote my mentor back in the 1980's, "programming is prose, the language is just punctuation".
A few years ago, one of my junior guys was marveling at a hacked-together bash/sed/awk script that I threw together to do some testing, and asked how many programming languages I knew.
I thought about it for a while, and came up with over 20 languages that I have used professionally in my (25+ year) career.
Some I know to the depths of  their existence (Smalltalk, C++, Forth), some that I became fairly proficient in (assembler, Python, Lisp), and others just enough to debug and extend existing code (Fortran, Perl, APL).
Right now I probably couldn't punch out an off-the-cuff program in most of the languages I have worked in, but give me a couple hours to google the syntax and it will come back to me.
What's hard is understand what your program does, and why.
THAT is why you go to university.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669233</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247431680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Which method of teaching is going to better provide me with the experience I need, as well as the experience an employer wants to see in a college graduate?</p></div><p>
As others have said, learn the concepts.<br>
<br>
You should also find a class that requires group programming.  Learn how to interact with fellow programmers, how to operate within a team environment, and how to document your thoughts and processes.  I've found that social skills are very valuable in any organization.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which method of teaching is going to better provide me with the experience I need , as well as the experience an employer wants to see in a college graduate ?
As others have said , learn the concepts .
You should also find a class that requires group programming .
Learn how to interact with fellow programmers , how to operate within a team environment , and how to document your thoughts and processes .
I 've found that social skills are very valuable in any organization .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which method of teaching is going to better provide me with the experience I need, as well as the experience an employer wants to see in a college graduate?
As others have said, learn the concepts.
You should also find a class that requires group programming.
Learn how to interact with fellow programmers, how to operate within a team environment, and how to document your thoughts and processes.
I've found that social skills are very valuable in any organization.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671003</id>
	<title>Training vs. Education</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247403780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My boss for my first real programming job (He liked to joke that he "worked" on ENIAC because his job as a student was to sweep out the CPU<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... yeah he really did) used to make the distinction between  the two approaches as Training vs. Education.<br>Traiing is just being told what to think, learning how to code in one language and think in one way, it will work for a while and whenthat goes out of fashion, you are left high and dry and inneed of re-training.<br>Education is learning How to think, what are the concepts necessary to solve a problem what advanced techniques will help you get the job done, choose the right tool etc.  education will alwys serve you well and you will realize that languages are a only a tool, the craftsman knows what to use and when.</p><p>I can't tell you how annoying it is to work with "trained"programmers that can't solve a problem, but can code like fiends.  Those are the people you have towrite specs for that probably take more time to write than if you just wrote the program yourself.<br>It is unfairto paintthem all with the same brush,but it has been my experience that the offshore programing talent is more trained than educated  I had very difficult times getting them to even understand why the results of a program they wrote aren't acceptable (here's how the date is accessed, here's how it is structured, here's what I want, it should look like this. The answers should be exactly the same as this example,,,,,  they'd rewrite, and come to me smiling with the wrong results.</p><p>Give me one person that I can present a problem, walk away and see thema few days later with good results or good progress and analysis and I'll value them more than 10 or more code monkeys.  In fact the'll be in charge of the code monkeys.<br>Also Ditto to the posts that value communications skills it will always serve you well.  I worked in small startup that liked to have the sales force and management bring in the IT guys to besure we were communicating directly, the problem was that my staff was from India primarily and the sales people spoke heavily in sports and movie metaphors, I was able to communicate with them because we shared a culture but my staff just smiled and nodded glassy eyed, they never played Baseball or Football, they never saw those movies etc... it really brought home to me the difference between knowing a language (the spoken kind) and being able to convey abstract concepts through shared culture or experiences.<br>I actually started a list of movies they should rent and had us play Baseball and Cricket at our next team building outing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My boss for my first real programming job ( He liked to joke that he " worked " on ENIAC because his job as a student was to sweep out the CPU .... yeah he really did ) used to make the distinction between the two approaches as Training vs. Education.Traiing is just being told what to think , learning how to code in one language and think in one way , it will work for a while and whenthat goes out of fashion , you are left high and dry and inneed of re-training.Education is learning How to think , what are the concepts necessary to solve a problem what advanced techniques will help you get the job done , choose the right tool etc .
education will alwys serve you well and you will realize that languages are a only a tool , the craftsman knows what to use and when.I ca n't tell you how annoying it is to work with " trained " programmers that ca n't solve a problem , but can code like fiends .
Those are the people you have towrite specs for that probably take more time to write than if you just wrote the program yourself.It is unfairto paintthem all with the same brush,but it has been my experience that the offshore programing talent is more trained than educated I had very difficult times getting them to even understand why the results of a program they wrote are n't acceptable ( here 's how the date is accessed , here 's how it is structured , here 's what I want , it should look like this .
The answers should be exactly the same as this example,,,, , they 'd rewrite , and come to me smiling with the wrong results.Give me one person that I can present a problem , walk away and see thema few days later with good results or good progress and analysis and I 'll value them more than 10 or more code monkeys .
In fact the 'll be in charge of the code monkeys.Also Ditto to the posts that value communications skills it will always serve you well .
I worked in small startup that liked to have the sales force and management bring in the IT guys to besure we were communicating directly , the problem was that my staff was from India primarily and the sales people spoke heavily in sports and movie metaphors , I was able to communicate with them because we shared a culture but my staff just smiled and nodded glassy eyed , they never played Baseball or Football , they never saw those movies etc... it really brought home to me the difference between knowing a language ( the spoken kind ) and being able to convey abstract concepts through shared culture or experiences.I actually started a list of movies they should rent and had us play Baseball and Cricket at our next team building outing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My boss for my first real programming job (He liked to joke that he "worked" on ENIAC because his job as a student was to sweep out the CPU .... yeah he really did) used to make the distinction between  the two approaches as Training vs. Education.Traiing is just being told what to think, learning how to code in one language and think in one way, it will work for a while and whenthat goes out of fashion, you are left high and dry and inneed of re-training.Education is learning How to think, what are the concepts necessary to solve a problem what advanced techniques will help you get the job done, choose the right tool etc.
education will alwys serve you well and you will realize that languages are a only a tool, the craftsman knows what to use and when.I can't tell you how annoying it is to work with "trained"programmers that can't solve a problem, but can code like fiends.
Those are the people you have towrite specs for that probably take more time to write than if you just wrote the program yourself.It is unfairto paintthem all with the same brush,but it has been my experience that the offshore programing talent is more trained than educated  I had very difficult times getting them to even understand why the results of a program they wrote aren't acceptable (here's how the date is accessed, here's how it is structured, here's what I want, it should look like this.
The answers should be exactly the same as this example,,,,,  they'd rewrite, and come to me smiling with the wrong results.Give me one person that I can present a problem, walk away and see thema few days later with good results or good progress and analysis and I'll value them more than 10 or more code monkeys.
In fact the'll be in charge of the code monkeys.Also Ditto to the posts that value communications skills it will always serve you well.
I worked in small startup that liked to have the sales force and management bring in the IT guys to besure we were communicating directly, the problem was that my staff was from India primarily and the sales people spoke heavily in sports and movie metaphors, I was able to communicate with them because we shared a culture but my staff just smiled and nodded glassy eyed, they never played Baseball or Football, they never saw those movies etc... it really brought home to me the difference between knowing a language (the spoken kind) and being able to convey abstract concepts through shared culture or experiences.I actually started a list of movies they should rent and had us play Baseball and Cricket at our next team building outing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671533</id>
	<title>MUMPS!</title>
	<author>Mumpsman</author>
	<datestamp>1247408760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job"<br> <br>

If, first and foremost, you are concerned about landing a programming job, it helps to know what industry you're looking to enter.  Healthcare and Electronic Medical Records are hot topics right now with a lot of money, private and public, backing it.  IT adoption in Healthcare is seen as a panacea for all that ails, and while I may not agree with that directly, there is certainly a lack of trained programmers willing to work in the field.  Most EMRs are decades old and use MUMPS as the back end.  <br> <br>

<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUMPS" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUMPS</a> [wikipedia.org]
<br> <br>
It's quirky, "old" and not OO, but if it's a JOB you want, there's worse things out there than helping deliver better care through M programming.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job " If , first and foremost , you are concerned about landing a programming job , it helps to know what industry you 're looking to enter .
Healthcare and Electronic Medical Records are hot topics right now with a lot of money , private and public , backing it .
IT adoption in Healthcare is seen as a panacea for all that ails , and while I may not agree with that directly , there is certainly a lack of trained programmers willing to work in the field .
Most EMRs are decades old and use MUMPS as the back end .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUMPS [ wikipedia.org ] It 's quirky , " old " and not OO , but if it 's a JOB you want , there 's worse things out there than helping deliver better care through M programming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job" 

If, first and foremost, you are concerned about landing a programming job, it helps to know what industry you're looking to enter.
Healthcare and Electronic Medical Records are hot topics right now with a lot of money, private and public, backing it.
IT adoption in Healthcare is seen as a panacea for all that ails, and while I may not agree with that directly, there is certainly a lack of trained programmers willing to work in the field.
Most EMRs are decades old and use MUMPS as the back end.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUMPS [wikipedia.org]
 
It's quirky, "old" and not OO, but if it's a JOB you want, there's worse things out there than helping deliver better care through M programming.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668975</id>
	<title>Same happened to me...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247429460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I got my Bachelors degree in 'Web Design and Multimedia' but the courses taught me a little about everything but not enough in anything to excel.  So, I'm left with teaching myself or going back to school... and I definitely  don't want to do that.  So, atm, I am trying to learn some C# and the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET framework.  GL to you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I got my Bachelors degree in 'Web Design and Multimedia ' but the courses taught me a little about everything but not enough in anything to excel .
So , I 'm left with teaching myself or going back to school... and I definitely do n't want to do that .
So , atm , I am trying to learn some C # and the .NET framework .
GL to you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got my Bachelors degree in 'Web Design and Multimedia' but the courses taught me a little about everything but not enough in anything to excel.
So, I'm left with teaching myself or going back to school... and I definitely  don't want to do that.
So, atm, I am trying to learn some C# and the .NET framework.
GL to you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674129</id>
	<title>Bubble Sort is needed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247485440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bubble Sort is needed so you can take and pass those stupid "pre-job" tests.  That's about the only use for it.</p><p>Algorithms and data structures are what you need and a healthy overview of a bunch of languages so every problem gets the appropriate tool.</p><p>Learn flex and yacc too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bubble Sort is needed so you can take and pass those stupid " pre-job " tests .
That 's about the only use for it.Algorithms and data structures are what you need and a healthy overview of a bunch of languages so every problem gets the appropriate tool.Learn flex and yacc too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bubble Sort is needed so you can take and pass those stupid "pre-job" tests.
That's about the only use for it.Algorithms and data structures are what you need and a healthy overview of a bunch of languages so every problem gets the appropriate tool.Learn flex and yacc too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671109</id>
	<title>languages are just the hammer that drives the nail</title>
	<author>martypantsROK</author>
	<datestamp>1247404620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>

My CS university didn't teach a single programming language. I'm happy about that. They taught concepts.

Languages come and go. Techniques are more about how to get something done than oddities or quirk about particular languages.

Learn the concepts of data structures, data access, communication and you'll be fine. Who knows what language will be important in a few years after you've graduated.

When I was in school in the 80s, Basic, Pascal and C were around. FORTRAN was considered dead, but that has so far been
proven to be wrong time and time again. Of course COBOL was around too, and I even learned some of that - but I'd never put it on a resume.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My CS university did n't teach a single programming language .
I 'm happy about that .
They taught concepts .
Languages come and go .
Techniques are more about how to get something done than oddities or quirk about particular languages .
Learn the concepts of data structures , data access , communication and you 'll be fine .
Who knows what language will be important in a few years after you 've graduated .
When I was in school in the 80s , Basic , Pascal and C were around .
FORTRAN was considered dead , but that has so far been proven to be wrong time and time again .
Of course COBOL was around too , and I even learned some of that - but I 'd never put it on a resume .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

My CS university didn't teach a single programming language.
I'm happy about that.
They taught concepts.
Languages come and go.
Techniques are more about how to get something done than oddities or quirk about particular languages.
Learn the concepts of data structures, data access, communication and you'll be fine.
Who knows what language will be important in a few years after you've graduated.
When I was in school in the 80s, Basic, Pascal and C were around.
FORTRAN was considered dead, but that has so far been
proven to be wrong time and time again.
Of course COBOL was around too, and I even learned some of that - but I'd never put it on a resume.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28687695</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247562240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>tbh, SQL isn't in-depth enough to really dedicate one's self to.  It should be coupled along with web development and other languages for databases, but you can't use it by itself, therefore it's useless compared to other languages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>tbh , SQL is n't in-depth enough to really dedicate one 's self to .
It should be coupled along with web development and other languages for databases , but you ca n't use it by itself , therefore it 's useless compared to other languages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tbh, SQL isn't in-depth enough to really dedicate one's self to.
It should be coupled along with web development and other languages for databases, but you can't use it by itself, therefore it's useless compared to other languages.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672651</id>
	<title>A lovely post</title>
	<author>symbolset</author>
	<datestamp>1247420700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have nothing to add.  Instead, I'll just quote you.
</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Being an expert in one programming language is fine if you just want to be a programmer. If you want to be a computer scientist, it's neither necessary nor sufficient.</p></div><p>That was beautiful.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have nothing to add .
Instead , I 'll just quote you .
Being an expert in one programming language is fine if you just want to be a programmer .
If you want to be a computer scientist , it 's neither necessary nor sufficient.That was beautiful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have nothing to add.
Instead, I'll just quote you.
Being an expert in one programming language is fine if you just want to be a programmer.
If you want to be a computer scientist, it's neither necessary nor sufficient.That was beautiful.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669835</id>
	<title>Re:Other "language skills" you may need</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247393520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Technology is not a zero sum game.  The existence of Indian programmers does not prevent good programmers in any other country from getting work.  Good is the key.  Improve your game, it's a better tactic than racism.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Technology is not a zero sum game .
The existence of Indian programmers does not prevent good programmers in any other country from getting work .
Good is the key .
Improve your game , it 's a better tactic than racism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Technology is not a zero sum game.
The existence of Indian programmers does not prevent good programmers in any other country from getting work.
Good is the key.
Improve your game, it's a better tactic than racism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669005</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677767</id>
	<title>Re:Go to a "trade school" for that. Not a universi</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1247505000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes."</p><p>If it teaches software development methodologies, or specific languages then it's not a pure CS degree. It may well be more valuable for most people - but call a spade a spade.</p></div><p>Is that from SICP?</p><p>I watched a few of the lectures on Youtube - that opening tirade about "Comp Sci is not Computer Science" just struck me as a waste of breath...  And it missed the point that learning to understand the process of problem-solving with computers is part of the path to understanding of the science behind it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes .
" If it teaches software development methodologies , or specific languages then it 's not a pure CS degree .
It may well be more valuable for most people - but call a spade a spade.Is that from SICP ? I watched a few of the lectures on Youtube - that opening tirade about " Comp Sci is not Computer Science " just struck me as a waste of breath... And it missed the point that learning to understand the process of problem-solving with computers is part of the path to understanding of the science behind it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.
"If it teaches software development methodologies, or specific languages then it's not a pure CS degree.
It may well be more valuable for most people - but call a spade a spade.Is that from SICP?I watched a few of the lectures on Youtube - that opening tirade about "Comp Sci is not Computer Science" just struck me as a waste of breath...  And it missed the point that learning to understand the process of problem-solving with computers is part of the path to understanding of the science behind it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669319</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674139</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>NightCreature83</author>
	<datestamp>1247485560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Object Oriented coding especially in the languages you name is an extention of imperative programming. There are only two real types of programming style and those are Imperative and Declarative, first categorie are procedural and OO, while the last has logical and functional programming.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Object Oriented coding especially in the languages you name is an extention of imperative programming .
There are only two real types of programming style and those are Imperative and Declarative , first categorie are procedural and OO , while the last has logical and functional programming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Object Oriented coding especially in the languages you name is an extention of imperative programming.
There are only two real types of programming style and those are Imperative and Declarative, first categorie are procedural and OO, while the last has logical and functional programming.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669269</id>
	<title>Re:C# and Bing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247432100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What employers want to see is the ability to write a C# program to automatically issue requests via HTTP to Bing to query the WWW and to retrieve the search results.</i></p><p>I've seen those job postings.  The problem is most employers require at least 5 years of Bing experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What employers want to see is the ability to write a C # program to automatically issue requests via HTTP to Bing to query the WWW and to retrieve the search results.I 've seen those job postings .
The problem is most employers require at least 5 years of Bing experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What employers want to see is the ability to write a C# program to automatically issue requests via HTTP to Bing to query the WWW and to retrieve the search results.I've seen those job postings.
The problem is most employers require at least 5 years of Bing experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28682797</id>
	<title>c++</title>
	<author>xmvince</author>
	<datestamp>1247480340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>c++ ftw

learn some BASH too if you want to be good with linux which is IMO just as important to know for developers</htmltext>
<tokenext>c + + ftw learn some BASH too if you want to be good with linux which is IMO just as important to know for developers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>c++ ftw

learn some BASH too if you want to be good with linux which is IMO just as important to know for developers</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669165</id>
	<title>Looks like you want to learn coding, not science.</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1247431080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps you should look at schools in India.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps you should look at schools in India .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps you should look at schools in India.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670085</id>
	<title>What school won't teach you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247395200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you really want to impress an employer after school, demonstrate that you've attempted to learn what most schools won't teach you:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; 1. Source control<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; 2. Source level debugging with gdb<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; a. Writing gdb macros<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; 3. Writing automated tests<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; 4. Maintaining existing code<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; 5. Working with globally distributed teams<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; 6. Working with experienced programmers<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; 7. Writing documentation and commenting code clearly</p><p>Participation in a large FOSS project like Open Office is a good way to learn all of the above.</p><p>The last thing is to be sure you have</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 8. Complete and utter mastery of linked lists, arrays and<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; hash tables, which are the three most used data structures<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; by a long shot, at least in systems work, which is what<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I do.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 9. Familiarity with bsearch( ) and qsort( ), or the equivalent in<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; your chosen language, and an understanding of when to<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; use them and when not to.</p><p>If you are struggling with weird stuff like scorpion graphs in some algorithms class, just concentrate on surviving.  Rest assured that you will never have to deal with one of these in industry. Learn the basics well, don't sweat the complicated stuff after the test, and you'll be fine.  But you sound like you need to work with code more.  See previous comment about FOSS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you really want to impress an employer after school , demonstrate that you 've attempted to learn what most schools wo n't teach you :     1 .
Source control     2 .
Source level debugging with gdb               a. Writing gdb macros     3 .
Writing automated tests     4 .
Maintaining existing code     5 .
Working with globally distributed teams     6 .
Working with experienced programmers     7 .
Writing documentation and commenting code clearlyParticipation in a large FOSS project like Open Office is a good way to learn all of the above.The last thing is to be sure you have       8 .
Complete and utter mastery of linked lists , arrays and               hash tables , which are the three most used data structures               by a long shot , at least in systems work , which is what               I do .
      9 .
Familiarity with bsearch ( ) and qsort ( ) , or the equivalent in               your chosen language , and an understanding of when to               use them and when not to.If you are struggling with weird stuff like scorpion graphs in some algorithms class , just concentrate on surviving .
Rest assured that you will never have to deal with one of these in industry .
Learn the basics well , do n't sweat the complicated stuff after the test , and you 'll be fine .
But you sound like you need to work with code more .
See previous comment about FOSS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you really want to impress an employer after school, demonstrate that you've attempted to learn what most schools won't teach you:
    1.
Source control
    2.
Source level debugging with gdb
              a. Writing gdb macros
    3.
Writing automated tests
    4.
Maintaining existing code
    5.
Working with globally distributed teams
    6.
Working with experienced programmers
    7.
Writing documentation and commenting code clearlyParticipation in a large FOSS project like Open Office is a good way to learn all of the above.The last thing is to be sure you have
      8.
Complete and utter mastery of linked lists, arrays and
              hash tables, which are the three most used data structures
              by a long shot, at least in systems work, which is what
              I do.
      9.
Familiarity with bsearch( ) and qsort( ), or the equivalent in
              your chosen language, and an understanding of when to
              use them and when not to.If you are struggling with weird stuff like scorpion graphs in some algorithms class, just concentrate on surviving.
Rest assured that you will never have to deal with one of these in industry.
Learn the basics well, don't sweat the complicated stuff after the test, and you'll be fine.
But you sound like you need to work with code more.
See previous comment about FOSS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669085</id>
	<title>What do you wanna be?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247430360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A code monkey or a computer scientist?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A code monkey or a computer scientist ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A code monkey or a computer scientist?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669991</id>
	<title>another perspective</title>
	<author>convolvatron</author>
	<datestamp>1247394480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>some programmers view programming as language design. the construction of abstractions<br>and their composition is really the same as defining a specialized version of the parent language<br>with the desired semantics.</p><p>if you really care about the topic learn broadly about languages. about how they handle<br>things like scoping, composition, interaction with the runtime, types, and static analysis.<br>i guarantee that you and your future employers will benefit</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>some programmers view programming as language design .
the construction of abstractionsand their composition is really the same as defining a specialized version of the parent languagewith the desired semantics.if you really care about the topic learn broadly about languages .
about how they handlethings like scoping , composition , interaction with the runtime , types , and static analysis.i guarantee that you and your future employers will benefit</tokentext>
<sentencetext>some programmers view programming as language design.
the construction of abstractionsand their composition is really the same as defining a specialized version of the parent languagewith the desired semantics.if you really care about the topic learn broadly about languages.
about how they handlethings like scoping, composition, interaction with the runtime, types, and static analysis.i guarantee that you and your future employers will benefit</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669859</id>
	<title>Re:HUH?!?</title>
	<author>Tontoman</author>
	<datestamp>1247393640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ha Ha, I've seen an entire huge web site programmed in Oracle Packages using PL/SQL (a lot of heavy string concatenation everywhere, which in plsql is the double pipe "||").  The Oracle salesman must have been really effective for this client, because they were planning on scraping even more of the non-oracle technology.  There was a tiny bit of jsp that was the shell that would just request the finished page from the database.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ha Ha , I 've seen an entire huge web site programmed in Oracle Packages using PL/SQL ( a lot of heavy string concatenation everywhere , which in plsql is the double pipe " | | " ) .
The Oracle salesman must have been really effective for this client , because they were planning on scraping even more of the non-oracle technology .
There was a tiny bit of jsp that was the shell that would just request the finished page from the database .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ha Ha, I've seen an entire huge web site programmed in Oracle Packages using PL/SQL (a lot of heavy string concatenation everywhere, which in plsql is the double pipe "||").
The Oracle salesman must have been really effective for this client, because they were planning on scraping even more of the non-oracle technology.
There was a tiny bit of jsp that was the shell that would just request the finished page from the database.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675433</id>
	<title>It depends on your goal.</title>
	<author>Eskarel</author>
	<datestamp>1247496300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the short term, a language focused course is better. It will help you get a job(so long as the language you want doesn't go out of style before you're done. If your goal is to get your foot in the door, then a language based course will probably help you do that(depending on where you live and what kind of jobs you're looking for). That's not an unworthy goal, and a lot of people go down that route, if you have a good course, one which actually teaches you how to use the language as opposed to just how to pass the certification, you'll probably get a lot out of it.</p><p>The problem with this approach is that it really binds you to a certain track in your career. You'll essentially be an expert in a certain language, which may or may not be the language you want to be in at any given time, and the skills from that language may or may not be easily transferable to another kind of job or another language, and it may or may not be easy for you to break out of the patterns which you have learned and do something else.</p><p>In the long term, knowing a bit about the theory is somewhat helpful. That's not to say that you should be going for a pure computer science degree or anything, personally I don't think that pure computer science should even exist at the undergraduate level. Leave all the largely pointless stuff to people who actually want to do research, there are very few jobs for that sort of thing, the competition is fairly fierce, and perhaps most importantly, most of those jobs are a lifestyle in and of themselves and require you to spend so much of your life at work that you probably won't have much time for anything else like a family. Nothing wrong with that, but it should be something you select fully knowing what it is, not something you ended up in because you didn't want a Business degree.</p><p>Personally I went through a degree program a lot like your new one(UW-Madison if you're interested), and while I don't use a lot of what I learned directly, the ways of thinking and the theory I learned have been quite invaluable as part of my career. I can also say that, while I use Java as part of my job these days, it has very little resemblance to the java I learned back in university. In those days, servlets, JSP, and all that sort of thing didn't really exist in the Java language, let alone beans or anything more advanced like that. You can take that however you like. That said, I graduated when things were still pretty bad after the dot com crash and I had to go halfway around the world and work in support for a couple of years to get where I am today, so there's pluses and minuses to any option you might take.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the short term , a language focused course is better .
It will help you get a job ( so long as the language you want does n't go out of style before you 're done .
If your goal is to get your foot in the door , then a language based course will probably help you do that ( depending on where you live and what kind of jobs you 're looking for ) .
That 's not an unworthy goal , and a lot of people go down that route , if you have a good course , one which actually teaches you how to use the language as opposed to just how to pass the certification , you 'll probably get a lot out of it.The problem with this approach is that it really binds you to a certain track in your career .
You 'll essentially be an expert in a certain language , which may or may not be the language you want to be in at any given time , and the skills from that language may or may not be easily transferable to another kind of job or another language , and it may or may not be easy for you to break out of the patterns which you have learned and do something else.In the long term , knowing a bit about the theory is somewhat helpful .
That 's not to say that you should be going for a pure computer science degree or anything , personally I do n't think that pure computer science should even exist at the undergraduate level .
Leave all the largely pointless stuff to people who actually want to do research , there are very few jobs for that sort of thing , the competition is fairly fierce , and perhaps most importantly , most of those jobs are a lifestyle in and of themselves and require you to spend so much of your life at work that you probably wo n't have much time for anything else like a family .
Nothing wrong with that , but it should be something you select fully knowing what it is , not something you ended up in because you did n't want a Business degree.Personally I went through a degree program a lot like your new one ( UW-Madison if you 're interested ) , and while I do n't use a lot of what I learned directly , the ways of thinking and the theory I learned have been quite invaluable as part of my career .
I can also say that , while I use Java as part of my job these days , it has very little resemblance to the java I learned back in university .
In those days , servlets , JSP , and all that sort of thing did n't really exist in the Java language , let alone beans or anything more advanced like that .
You can take that however you like .
That said , I graduated when things were still pretty bad after the dot com crash and I had to go halfway around the world and work in support for a couple of years to get where I am today , so there 's pluses and minuses to any option you might take .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the short term, a language focused course is better.
It will help you get a job(so long as the language you want doesn't go out of style before you're done.
If your goal is to get your foot in the door, then a language based course will probably help you do that(depending on where you live and what kind of jobs you're looking for).
That's not an unworthy goal, and a lot of people go down that route, if you have a good course, one which actually teaches you how to use the language as opposed to just how to pass the certification, you'll probably get a lot out of it.The problem with this approach is that it really binds you to a certain track in your career.
You'll essentially be an expert in a certain language, which may or may not be the language you want to be in at any given time, and the skills from that language may or may not be easily transferable to another kind of job or another language, and it may or may not be easy for you to break out of the patterns which you have learned and do something else.In the long term, knowing a bit about the theory is somewhat helpful.
That's not to say that you should be going for a pure computer science degree or anything, personally I don't think that pure computer science should even exist at the undergraduate level.
Leave all the largely pointless stuff to people who actually want to do research, there are very few jobs for that sort of thing, the competition is fairly fierce, and perhaps most importantly, most of those jobs are a lifestyle in and of themselves and require you to spend so much of your life at work that you probably won't have much time for anything else like a family.
Nothing wrong with that, but it should be something you select fully knowing what it is, not something you ended up in because you didn't want a Business degree.Personally I went through a degree program a lot like your new one(UW-Madison if you're interested), and while I don't use a lot of what I learned directly, the ways of thinking and the theory I learned have been quite invaluable as part of my career.
I can also say that, while I use Java as part of my job these days, it has very little resemblance to the java I learned back in university.
In those days, servlets, JSP, and all that sort of thing didn't really exist in the Java language, let alone beans or anything more advanced like that.
You can take that however you like.
That said, I graduated when things were still pretty bad after the dot com crash and I had to go halfway around the world and work in support for a couple of years to get where I am today, so there's pluses and minuses to any option you might take.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673009</id>
	<title>First 5000 SLOC???</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1247425860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sucky Lines Of Crap?</p><p>Well, let's just say my 2nd 5,000 sucked less.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sucky Lines Of Crap ? Well , let 's just say my 2nd 5,000 sucked less .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sucky Lines Of Crap?Well, let's just say my 2nd 5,000 sucked less.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669031</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672909</id>
	<title>APL, Lisp, Forth, Assembler, Fortran, PL1</title>
	<author>rcpitt</author>
	<datestamp>1247424480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>APL because you should learn at least one "write once, read never" language well enough to solve any problem with it yet not be able to read the solution two weeks after you wrote it.
<p>
LISP because you should learn that a really restrictive syntax can still be useful - and to covet less restrictive languages for what they attempt to be
</p><p>
FORTH because you should understand RPN and how to really use a stack when it makes sense
</p><p>
Assembler (or better yet, machine language) so you can appreciate what goes on at the hardware level and truly understand why you should revere and worship compiler writers - or better yet, if you have the math ability, become one - they're getting scarce.
</p><p>
Fortran because you should understand why scientists like it so much and why you should not annoy them unnecessarily about this
</p><p>
PL1 so you can appreciate just how much cruft can intrude on what might otherwise have been a truly useful language, all in the name of being "the only tool you'll need"
</p><p>
Having done this you'll be prepared to learn any language's syntax and understand that in most cases it is the libraries that you really need to learn and appreciate. You'll learn the language that makes your employer happy or that is most relevant to the project at hand - and probably keep on learning languages for the rest of your life. I know - I've never stopped - forgotten more than mentioned above by at least an order of magnitude.
</p><p>
But if you want to sit in a cube farm and crank code day after day then by all means, learn and live with only C++ or C# or even Java. Personally, I'd rather hire someone a bit more flexible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>APL because you should learn at least one " write once , read never " language well enough to solve any problem with it yet not be able to read the solution two weeks after you wrote it .
LISP because you should learn that a really restrictive syntax can still be useful - and to covet less restrictive languages for what they attempt to be FORTH because you should understand RPN and how to really use a stack when it makes sense Assembler ( or better yet , machine language ) so you can appreciate what goes on at the hardware level and truly understand why you should revere and worship compiler writers - or better yet , if you have the math ability , become one - they 're getting scarce .
Fortran because you should understand why scientists like it so much and why you should not annoy them unnecessarily about this PL1 so you can appreciate just how much cruft can intrude on what might otherwise have been a truly useful language , all in the name of being " the only tool you 'll need " Having done this you 'll be prepared to learn any language 's syntax and understand that in most cases it is the libraries that you really need to learn and appreciate .
You 'll learn the language that makes your employer happy or that is most relevant to the project at hand - and probably keep on learning languages for the rest of your life .
I know - I 've never stopped - forgotten more than mentioned above by at least an order of magnitude .
But if you want to sit in a cube farm and crank code day after day then by all means , learn and live with only C + + or C # or even Java .
Personally , I 'd rather hire someone a bit more flexible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>APL because you should learn at least one "write once, read never" language well enough to solve any problem with it yet not be able to read the solution two weeks after you wrote it.
LISP because you should learn that a really restrictive syntax can still be useful - and to covet less restrictive languages for what they attempt to be

FORTH because you should understand RPN and how to really use a stack when it makes sense

Assembler (or better yet, machine language) so you can appreciate what goes on at the hardware level and truly understand why you should revere and worship compiler writers - or better yet, if you have the math ability, become one - they're getting scarce.
Fortran because you should understand why scientists like it so much and why you should not annoy them unnecessarily about this

PL1 so you can appreciate just how much cruft can intrude on what might otherwise have been a truly useful language, all in the name of being "the only tool you'll need"

Having done this you'll be prepared to learn any language's syntax and understand that in most cases it is the libraries that you really need to learn and appreciate.
You'll learn the language that makes your employer happy or that is most relevant to the project at hand - and probably keep on learning languages for the rest of your life.
I know - I've never stopped - forgotten more than mentioned above by at least an order of magnitude.
But if you want to sit in a cube farm and crank code day after day then by all means, learn and live with only C++ or C# or even Java.
Personally, I'd rather hire someone a bit more flexible.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28681919</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247476560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wish this was more well-known. SQL is stupidly important in business. Oftentimes the SQL part (by which I mean the actual SQL, the database design, the SQL triggers/interfaces, the actual physical database hookups, etc.) is the major factor in any design. It's not exactly glamorous but when you're trying to piece together 4 databases that are up 24/7 while fitting together all the data in real-time, you really start to care less about which developing environment you're using. C? Lisp? PHP? Who cares.</p><p>I find I often can, when offering man-hour estimates, nail down pretty much everything. The databases, however, I always give wide bearth (and usually double my estimate on that part).</p><p>Besides, SQL is a neat language at times.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish this was more well-known .
SQL is stupidly important in business .
Oftentimes the SQL part ( by which I mean the actual SQL , the database design , the SQL triggers/interfaces , the actual physical database hookups , etc .
) is the major factor in any design .
It 's not exactly glamorous but when you 're trying to piece together 4 databases that are up 24/7 while fitting together all the data in real-time , you really start to care less about which developing environment you 're using .
C ? Lisp ?
PHP ? Who cares.I find I often can , when offering man-hour estimates , nail down pretty much everything .
The databases , however , I always give wide bearth ( and usually double my estimate on that part ) .Besides , SQL is a neat language at times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish this was more well-known.
SQL is stupidly important in business.
Oftentimes the SQL part (by which I mean the actual SQL, the database design, the SQL triggers/interfaces, the actual physical database hookups, etc.
) is the major factor in any design.
It's not exactly glamorous but when you're trying to piece together 4 databases that are up 24/7 while fitting together all the data in real-time, you really start to care less about which developing environment you're using.
C? Lisp?
PHP? Who cares.I find I often can, when offering man-hour estimates, nail down pretty much everything.
The databases, however, I always give wide bearth (and usually double my estimate on that part).Besides, SQL is a neat language at times.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672689</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>complete loony</author>
	<datestamp>1247421000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another thing that was certainly missing from my own CS curriculum (admittedly  10 years ago) was practical experience with using source control systems. I'm not trying to suggest that using source control or SQL should require an extra semester subject, just that the way contrived assignments are designed should be similar to the way real world applications are written.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another thing that was certainly missing from my own CS curriculum ( admittedly 10 years ago ) was practical experience with using source control systems .
I 'm not trying to suggest that using source control or SQL should require an extra semester subject , just that the way contrived assignments are designed should be similar to the way real world applications are written .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another thing that was certainly missing from my own CS curriculum (admittedly  10 years ago) was practical experience with using source control systems.
I'm not trying to suggest that using source control or SQL should require an extra semester subject, just that the way contrived assignments are designed should be similar to the way real world applications are written.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670401</id>
	<title>Sounds like you want a community college</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247398020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>     Sounds to me like you want a community college.  If you want to learn a specific, fixed list of skills to go straight out to work using those skills, you want a community college.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Learning a broad range of languages will allow for broader knowledge of programming, allowing for better coding even if using just one language, but will also allow for learning new languages much more quickly.  C++ only?  If you begin using a new language and it's not like C++, you're learning from scratch.  With the multi-language education, it'll be like "Hmm, this seems like a nice combination of Python and java" for instance.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; You can see where I'm leaning with this I think, I would go for the broad range of languages.  But if you do have jobs in mind that *just* use C++ and OpenGL (for instance), then by all means I don't think it'll be a horrible decision to go somewhere more focused.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds to me like you want a community college .
If you want to learn a specific , fixed list of skills to go straight out to work using those skills , you want a community college .
          Learning a broad range of languages will allow for broader knowledge of programming , allowing for better coding even if using just one language , but will also allow for learning new languages much more quickly .
C + + only ?
If you begin using a new language and it 's not like C + + , you 're learning from scratch .
With the multi-language education , it 'll be like " Hmm , this seems like a nice combination of Python and java " for instance .
          You can see where I 'm leaning with this I think , I would go for the broad range of languages .
But if you do have jobs in mind that * just * use C + + and OpenGL ( for instance ) , then by all means I do n't think it 'll be a horrible decision to go somewhere more focused .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>     Sounds to me like you want a community college.
If you want to learn a specific, fixed list of skills to go straight out to work using those skills, you want a community college.
          Learning a broad range of languages will allow for broader knowledge of programming, allowing for better coding even if using just one language, but will also allow for learning new languages much more quickly.
C++ only?
If you begin using a new language and it's not like C++, you're learning from scratch.
With the multi-language education, it'll be like "Hmm, this seems like a nice combination of Python and java" for instance.
          You can see where I'm leaning with this I think, I would go for the broad range of languages.
But if you do have jobs in mind that *just* use C++ and OpenGL (for instance), then by all means I don't think it'll be a horrible decision to go somewhere more focused.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670109</id>
	<title>One strategy that might be fruitful</title>
	<author>caywen</author>
	<datestamp>1247395440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Try learning a simple assembly language or IL, like ARM or CIL. Or better yet, make up your own implementation (like, some stack-based evaluation system). Then, try writing your own language and see what you come up with. I tried this when I was taking CS and it really enhanced my practical understanding of much of the theory they threw at us.</p><p>Actually, this was exactly what they were having us do, I just didn't fully realize it because of all the jargon and terminology I found kind of above my head at the time. But the experience really did help me later think about things like Java and C++ actually work, and more importantly, why.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Try learning a simple assembly language or IL , like ARM or CIL .
Or better yet , make up your own implementation ( like , some stack-based evaluation system ) .
Then , try writing your own language and see what you come up with .
I tried this when I was taking CS and it really enhanced my practical understanding of much of the theory they threw at us.Actually , this was exactly what they were having us do , I just did n't fully realize it because of all the jargon and terminology I found kind of above my head at the time .
But the experience really did help me later think about things like Java and C + + actually work , and more importantly , why .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try learning a simple assembly language or IL, like ARM or CIL.
Or better yet, make up your own implementation (like, some stack-based evaluation system).
Then, try writing your own language and see what you come up with.
I tried this when I was taking CS and it really enhanced my practical understanding of much of the theory they threw at us.Actually, this was exactly what they were having us do, I just didn't fully realize it because of all the jargon and terminology I found kind of above my head at the time.
But the experience really did help me later think about things like Java and C++ actually work, and more importantly, why.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28680623</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>euxneks</author>
	<datestamp>1247514420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If there is a single language that is not taught enough for real world experience, it's SQL. Just about any business programming job is going to involve storing and reporting on data. While a CS degree is going to give you a basic introduction to SQL, I feel that SQL should be introduced earlier and worked into more of the assignments you are asked to write.</p></div><p>
Agreed, especially since you can do a whole lot of interesting things with a simple SQLite DB in your application.<br>
Mod parent up!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If there is a single language that is not taught enough for real world experience , it 's SQL .
Just about any business programming job is going to involve storing and reporting on data .
While a CS degree is going to give you a basic introduction to SQL , I feel that SQL should be introduced earlier and worked into more of the assignments you are asked to write .
Agreed , especially since you can do a whole lot of interesting things with a simple SQLite DB in your application .
Mod parent up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there is a single language that is not taught enough for real world experience, it's SQL.
Just about any business programming job is going to involve storing and reporting on data.
While a CS degree is going to give you a basic introduction to SQL, I feel that SQL should be introduced earlier and worked into more of the assignments you are asked to write.
Agreed, especially since you can do a whole lot of interesting things with a simple SQLite DB in your application.
Mod parent up!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670189</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>codepunk</author>
	<datestamp>1247395980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Learn about Binary Search Trees, Red Black Trees, Bubble Sort, Quick Sort, Heaps, etc. Depends entirely on what you plan to be doing when leaving school. These<br>algorithms are seldom used when programming things like business apps. In fact I don't think I can ever recall implementing a search algorithm as you mention<br>after school.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Learn about Binary Search Trees , Red Black Trees , Bubble Sort , Quick Sort , Heaps , etc .
Depends entirely on what you plan to be doing when leaving school .
Thesealgorithms are seldom used when programming things like business apps .
In fact I do n't think I can ever recall implementing a search algorithm as you mentionafter school .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Learn about Binary Search Trees, Red Black Trees, Bubble Sort, Quick Sort, Heaps, etc.
Depends entirely on what you plan to be doing when leaving school.
Thesealgorithms are seldom used when programming things like business apps.
In fact I don't think I can ever recall implementing a search algorithm as you mentionafter school.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669117</id>
	<title>Re: Which Language Approach For a Computer Science</title>
	<author>trwww</author>
	<datestamp>1247430720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job.</p><p>You HAVE to practice writing software on seperate/personal projects while in school.</p><p>It doesn't matter what they teach in a CS degree program, if you don't work on personal projects, you'll never be a great software developer.</p><p>In other words, what they teach in the program is irrelevant. A Bachelors degree in Computer Science does not give anyone expertise required to land a good job. the It is what you do outside of class that gives you the expertise required to land a good job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job.You HAVE to practice writing software on seperate/personal projects while in school.It does n't matter what they teach in a CS degree program , if you do n't work on personal projects , you 'll never be a great software developer.In other words , what they teach in the program is irrelevant .
A Bachelors degree in Computer Science does not give anyone expertise required to land a good job .
the It is what you do outside of class that gives you the expertise required to land a good job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; I also feel that I am going to come out of school not having the expertise required in a single language to land a good job.You HAVE to practice writing software on seperate/personal projects while in school.It doesn't matter what they teach in a CS degree program, if you don't work on personal projects, you'll never be a great software developer.In other words, what they teach in the program is irrelevant.
A Bachelors degree in Computer Science does not give anyone expertise required to land a good job.
the It is what you do outside of class that gives you the expertise required to land a good job.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672767</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>OrangeCatholic</author>
	<datestamp>1247422440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll agree that cs is a philosophy, but not knowing how to program makes you feel like shit. In eight semesters, I took about 32 classes.  Of those, four were programming classes, and one of them was "Intro."  Two were electives.
<br> <br>
For the average teenager, a theoretical education is really going beyond what they need for the next stage of their lives.  It's true that anyone with a theoretical understanding can fall back to practical application, but the problem is, until you actually <i>do it for real</i>, nobody is going to take you seriously.
<br> <br>
I walked out of college basically hysterical.  "I know matrix algebra!!!"  Nobody cared.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll agree that cs is a philosophy , but not knowing how to program makes you feel like shit .
In eight semesters , I took about 32 classes .
Of those , four were programming classes , and one of them was " Intro .
" Two were electives .
For the average teenager , a theoretical education is really going beyond what they need for the next stage of their lives .
It 's true that anyone with a theoretical understanding can fall back to practical application , but the problem is , until you actually do it for real , nobody is going to take you seriously .
I walked out of college basically hysterical .
" I know matrix algebra ! ! !
" Nobody cared .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll agree that cs is a philosophy, but not knowing how to program makes you feel like shit.
In eight semesters, I took about 32 classes.
Of those, four were programming classes, and one of them was "Intro.
"  Two were electives.
For the average teenager, a theoretical education is really going beyond what they need for the next stage of their lives.
It's true that anyone with a theoretical understanding can fall back to practical application, but the problem is, until you actually do it for real, nobody is going to take you seriously.
I walked out of college basically hysterical.
"I know matrix algebra!!!
"  Nobody cared.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674881</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247493120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Do you actually know of a good computer scientist who can't program?"</p><p>Do you actually know of a good computer scientist that is limited by a programming language?</p><p>That's the point Dijkstra was making:  It is the analytical and problem solving skills that are important.  The computer language that is used is irrelevant. The computer language is the medium one uses to construct a program that solves the immediate problem.  Languages are transitory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Do you actually know of a good computer scientist who ca n't program ?
" Do you actually know of a good computer scientist that is limited by a programming language ? That 's the point Dijkstra was making : It is the analytical and problem solving skills that are important .
The computer language that is used is irrelevant .
The computer language is the medium one uses to construct a program that solves the immediate problem .
Languages are transitory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Do you actually know of a good computer scientist who can't program?
"Do you actually know of a good computer scientist that is limited by a programming language?That's the point Dijkstra was making:  It is the analytical and problem solving skills that are important.
The computer language that is used is irrelevant.
The computer language is the medium one uses to construct a program that solves the immediate problem.
Languages are transitory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671133</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669275</id>
	<title>Learn to think first</title>
	<author>thomasoa</author>
	<datestamp>1247432160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm firmly of the opinion that you should learn as many different programming languages as you can early on, so you learn how to think in each language and understand what the strengths and weaknesses of langauges are.

Honestly, if you learn on language really well, you'll have a niche, but you won't be able to grow nearly as well as if you have loads of experience working in different languages.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm firmly of the opinion that you should learn as many different programming languages as you can early on , so you learn how to think in each language and understand what the strengths and weaknesses of langauges are .
Honestly , if you learn on language really well , you 'll have a niche , but you wo n't be able to grow nearly as well as if you have loads of experience working in different languages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm firmly of the opinion that you should learn as many different programming languages as you can early on, so you learn how to think in each language and understand what the strengths and weaknesses of langauges are.
Honestly, if you learn on language really well, you'll have a niche, but you won't be able to grow nearly as well as if you have loads of experience working in different languages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676569</id>
	<title>Specialization is for insects</title>
	<author>wcrowe</author>
	<datestamp>1247500980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take the classes in the other languages.  It will help you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take the classes in the other languages .
It will help you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take the classes in the other languages.
It will help you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670343</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>Jerry</author>
	<datestamp>1247397540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most people who have any talent at all for programming usually "invent" the bubble sort during their first attempt to re-arrange data in arrays, even before they read about it, so easy is the bubble sort to code.</p><p>The bubble sort is just an example of why software patents are ridiculous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most people who have any talent at all for programming usually " invent " the bubble sort during their first attempt to re-arrange data in arrays , even before they read about it , so easy is the bubble sort to code.The bubble sort is just an example of why software patents are ridiculous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most people who have any talent at all for programming usually "invent" the bubble sort during their first attempt to re-arrange data in arrays, even before they read about it, so easy is the bubble sort to code.The bubble sort is just an example of why software patents are ridiculous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671677</id>
	<title>JIT sorting knowledge?</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1247409900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, I think it's important to understand what "sorting" is and then know how to use the standard libraries (of whatever language) to do the sorting for you.</p><p>If someday in the future of your career you need a faster sort, google it up. Chances are the solution you'd find would be better than what you had learned in school (had you been paying attention).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , I think it 's important to understand what " sorting " is and then know how to use the standard libraries ( of whatever language ) to do the sorting for you.If someday in the future of your career you need a faster sort , google it up .
Chances are the solution you 'd find would be better than what you had learned in school ( had you been paying attention ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, I think it's important to understand what "sorting" is and then know how to use the standard libraries (of whatever language) to do the sorting for you.If someday in the future of your career you need a faster sort, google it up.
Chances are the solution you'd find would be better than what you had learned in school (had you been paying attention).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671893</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>JoeF</author>
	<datestamp>1247412360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed. It is the algorithms that matter. A programming language is just a tool to implement the algorithms.<br>You don't go to college to learn how to use a hammer. You go to college to learn how to build things, using different tools, including, but not limited to a hammer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed .
It is the algorithms that matter .
A programming language is just a tool to implement the algorithms.You do n't go to college to learn how to use a hammer .
You go to college to learn how to build things , using different tools , including , but not limited to a hammer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed.
It is the algorithms that matter.
A programming language is just a tool to implement the algorithms.You don't go to college to learn how to use a hammer.
You go to college to learn how to build things, using different tools, including, but not limited to a hammer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670205</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247396100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With some specific narrow sets a optimized bubble sort with flag can perform better than quicksort, something that any CS-student should know.</p><p>They are few and far between of though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With some specific narrow sets a optimized bubble sort with flag can perform better than quicksort , something that any CS-student should know.They are few and far between of though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With some specific narrow sets a optimized bubble sort with flag can perform better than quicksort, something that any CS-student should know.They are few and far between of though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28683083</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247481480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Which method of teaching is going to better provide me with the experience I need, as well as the experience an employer wants to see in a college graduate?"</p></div><p>None of them. The point of college is to provide knowledge, you are expected to earn your own experience. I believe the term is "graduate studies", a nice way of saying "we have given you the tools, now prove you can take it from here and learn on your own."</p><p>You have fallen victim to a common misconception- you went to a college &amp; what you wanted was to go to a trade school that specialized in programming applications.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which method of teaching is going to better provide me with the experience I need , as well as the experience an employer wants to see in a college graduate ?
" None of them .
The point of college is to provide knowledge , you are expected to earn your own experience .
I believe the term is " graduate studies " , a nice way of saying " we have given you the tools , now prove you can take it from here and learn on your own .
" You have fallen victim to a common misconception- you went to a college &amp; what you wanted was to go to a trade school that specialized in programming applications .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which method of teaching is going to better provide me with the experience I need, as well as the experience an employer wants to see in a college graduate?
"None of them.
The point of college is to provide knowledge, you are expected to earn your own experience.
I believe the term is "graduate studies", a nice way of saying "we have given you the tools, now prove you can take it from here and learn on your own.
"You have fallen victim to a common misconception- you went to a college &amp; what you wanted was to go to a trade school that specialized in programming applications.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669285</id>
	<title>Expertise!?</title>
	<author>Aladrin</author>
	<datestamp>1247432220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You don't graduate a college/uni with 'expertise'.  You graduate with knowledge.  Expertise is learned by actually working in the field.  The closest you might come is if you find a school that requires you to apprentice for 2 years before you can graduate, like a medical doctor/nurse/etc has to.  I doubt you'll find one.</p><p>Stop thinking you need to learn a language and start thinking you need to learn to program.  A good programmer can pick up any language as needed.  A great programmer can start programming on day 1 with just a reference book and no prior knowledge of the language.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't graduate a college/uni with 'expertise' .
You graduate with knowledge .
Expertise is learned by actually working in the field .
The closest you might come is if you find a school that requires you to apprentice for 2 years before you can graduate , like a medical doctor/nurse/etc has to .
I doubt you 'll find one.Stop thinking you need to learn a language and start thinking you need to learn to program .
A good programmer can pick up any language as needed .
A great programmer can start programming on day 1 with just a reference book and no prior knowledge of the language .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't graduate a college/uni with 'expertise'.
You graduate with knowledge.
Expertise is learned by actually working in the field.
The closest you might come is if you find a school that requires you to apprentice for 2 years before you can graduate, like a medical doctor/nurse/etc has to.
I doubt you'll find one.Stop thinking you need to learn a language and start thinking you need to learn to program.
A good programmer can pick up any language as needed.
A great programmer can start programming on day 1 with just a reference book and no prior knowledge of the language.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668957</id>
	<title>Go with the way your new school does it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247429340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, let me put it to you this way:</p><p>Let's say I'm a hiring manager and conducting interviews for junior programmers.</p><p>If you get your degree from the first school, I'm only going to hire you if I
need a person who's going to write the code he's told to write.  I'm never
going to assign stuff to you that requires you to do any kind of analysis.</p><p>If you get your degree from the school to which you transferred, you are far
more likely to get hired into a position with a lot of growth opportunities.
You will have not only know some of several languages, you will also
have a good background in abstract concepts.</p><p>The problem with most schools today is that they focus far too narrowly
on one topic instead of teaching the concepts necessary to handle what tasks
are placed in front of the graduates. There have been several articles about the
"Java schools" and how the graduates of them can barely program their way out of
a paper bag because they don't have the broader information necessary to do a
proper analysis.  Sure, with modern languages you can often "ignore" things like
memory management and code optimization.  Unfortunately, all too often I've seen
what happens when things are written by people who have no understanding of how to
apply basic concepts... when something should be a compiled application... when
something should be a simple shell script (mind you, the person who did this thinks
that a compiled program with calls to "system()" make this a "system program" and
doesn't even know how to write a shell script... I am going to have to clean up that
mess in the near future)... and even when to use what language.</p><p>No one language is the be-all and end-all of programming.  Each language is a
tool.  You don't normally use a screwdriver to hammer in a nail or as a chisel...
so why should you use C or C++ to write what is better written as a shell script?
Why would you use Java to write something that requries careful memory management?
(Yes, I know some people would just put the question mark after "Java"...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:) )
Because it's all you know how to do?  Guess what... either you're not getting the
job for which you just interviewed or I'm going to have to go hire someone else to
augment my team to do what you should've been able to do... which means when it
comes time for RIFs, you're name is going to go towards the top of the list because
you can only minimally contribute to the team.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , let me put it to you this way : Let 's say I 'm a hiring manager and conducting interviews for junior programmers.If you get your degree from the first school , I 'm only going to hire you if I need a person who 's going to write the code he 's told to write .
I 'm never going to assign stuff to you that requires you to do any kind of analysis.If you get your degree from the school to which you transferred , you are far more likely to get hired into a position with a lot of growth opportunities .
You will have not only know some of several languages , you will also have a good background in abstract concepts.The problem with most schools today is that they focus far too narrowly on one topic instead of teaching the concepts necessary to handle what tasks are placed in front of the graduates .
There have been several articles about the " Java schools " and how the graduates of them can barely program their way out of a paper bag because they do n't have the broader information necessary to do a proper analysis .
Sure , with modern languages you can often " ignore " things like memory management and code optimization .
Unfortunately , all too often I 've seen what happens when things are written by people who have no understanding of how to apply basic concepts... when something should be a compiled application... when something should be a simple shell script ( mind you , the person who did this thinks that a compiled program with calls to " system ( ) " make this a " system program " and does n't even know how to write a shell script... I am going to have to clean up that mess in the near future ) ... and even when to use what language.No one language is the be-all and end-all of programming .
Each language is a tool .
You do n't normally use a screwdriver to hammer in a nail or as a chisel.. . so why should you use C or C + + to write what is better written as a shell script ?
Why would you use Java to write something that requries careful memory management ?
( Yes , I know some people would just put the question mark after " Java " ... : ) ) Because it 's all you know how to do ?
Guess what... either you 're not getting the job for which you just interviewed or I 'm going to have to go hire someone else to augment my team to do what you should 've been able to do... which means when it comes time for RIFs , you 're name is going to go towards the top of the list because you can only minimally contribute to the team .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, let me put it to you this way:Let's say I'm a hiring manager and conducting interviews for junior programmers.If you get your degree from the first school, I'm only going to hire you if I
need a person who's going to write the code he's told to write.
I'm never
going to assign stuff to you that requires you to do any kind of analysis.If you get your degree from the school to which you transferred, you are far
more likely to get hired into a position with a lot of growth opportunities.
You will have not only know some of several languages, you will also
have a good background in abstract concepts.The problem with most schools today is that they focus far too narrowly
on one topic instead of teaching the concepts necessary to handle what tasks
are placed in front of the graduates.
There have been several articles about the
"Java schools" and how the graduates of them can barely program their way out of
a paper bag because they don't have the broader information necessary to do a
proper analysis.
Sure, with modern languages you can often "ignore" things like
memory management and code optimization.
Unfortunately, all too often I've seen
what happens when things are written by people who have no understanding of how to
apply basic concepts... when something should be a compiled application... when
something should be a simple shell script (mind you, the person who did this thinks
that a compiled program with calls to "system()" make this a "system program" and
doesn't even know how to write a shell script... I am going to have to clean up that
mess in the near future)... and even when to use what language.No one language is the be-all and end-all of programming.
Each language is a
tool.
You don't normally use a screwdriver to hammer in a nail or as a chisel...
so why should you use C or C++ to write what is better written as a shell script?
Why would you use Java to write something that requries careful memory management?
(Yes, I know some people would just put the question mark after "Java"... :) )
Because it's all you know how to do?
Guess what... either you're not getting the
job for which you just interviewed or I'm going to have to go hire someone else to
augment my team to do what you should've been able to do... which means when it
comes time for RIFs, you're name is going to go towards the top of the list because
you can only minimally contribute to the team.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671133</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247404920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you may be taking Dijkstra out of context. While it's important not to be tied to the physics of contemporary computers, his own algorithms do make assumptions about the machine that might implement them. For example, many problems are trivially solved by a infinite number of infinitely fast CPUs, but that doesn't get us anywhere. Take the simple binary search, for example, and you'll see the core assumption that comparisons are expensive. It is in that sense that computer science is about computers, although it must not be limited to what contemporary computers can do.</p><p>But more to the point, Knuth <b>is</b> an expert in programming. He wrote TeX, one of the most famously bug-free* programs in existence. I agree completely with his point of not getting bogged down by the language du jour, but I'm not talking about the language du jour. I'm talking about <b>a</b> language.</p><p>Do you actually know of a good computer scientist who can't program?</p><p>* US$327.68 awaits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you may be taking Dijkstra out of context .
While it 's important not to be tied to the physics of contemporary computers , his own algorithms do make assumptions about the machine that might implement them .
For example , many problems are trivially solved by a infinite number of infinitely fast CPUs , but that does n't get us anywhere .
Take the simple binary search , for example , and you 'll see the core assumption that comparisons are expensive .
It is in that sense that computer science is about computers , although it must not be limited to what contemporary computers can do.But more to the point , Knuth is an expert in programming .
He wrote TeX , one of the most famously bug-free * programs in existence .
I agree completely with his point of not getting bogged down by the language du jour , but I 'm not talking about the language du jour .
I 'm talking about a language.Do you actually know of a good computer scientist who ca n't program ?
* US $ 327.68 awaits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you may be taking Dijkstra out of context.
While it's important not to be tied to the physics of contemporary computers, his own algorithms do make assumptions about the machine that might implement them.
For example, many problems are trivially solved by a infinite number of infinitely fast CPUs, but that doesn't get us anywhere.
Take the simple binary search, for example, and you'll see the core assumption that comparisons are expensive.
It is in that sense that computer science is about computers, although it must not be limited to what contemporary computers can do.But more to the point, Knuth is an expert in programming.
He wrote TeX, one of the most famously bug-free* programs in existence.
I agree completely with his point of not getting bogged down by the language du jour, but I'm not talking about the language du jour.
I'm talking about a language.Do you actually know of a good computer scientist who can't program?
* US$327.68 awaits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669031</id>
	<title>Languages don't matter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247429940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I make the hiring decisions at my company. I check to see if people can solve complex problems. I don't care what language you know. You can learn PHP in a couple of hours. Sure, your first 5.000 SLOC are going to look like whatever language you know best, but right out of college your first 5.000 SLOC are going to suck anyway.</p><p>Learning a bunch of languages has the advantage that you learn what concepts are universal to programming and what are just entrenched in the language, but what really matters is learning to think algorithmically, no matter how many languages you know, be it one or one thousand.</p><p>It sounds like you've already made your decision about which school you're attending, you just want some assurance that this education won't be wasted. Let me assure you that it won't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I make the hiring decisions at my company .
I check to see if people can solve complex problems .
I do n't care what language you know .
You can learn PHP in a couple of hours .
Sure , your first 5.000 SLOC are going to look like whatever language you know best , but right out of college your first 5.000 SLOC are going to suck anyway.Learning a bunch of languages has the advantage that you learn what concepts are universal to programming and what are just entrenched in the language , but what really matters is learning to think algorithmically , no matter how many languages you know , be it one or one thousand.It sounds like you 've already made your decision about which school you 're attending , you just want some assurance that this education wo n't be wasted .
Let me assure you that it wo n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I make the hiring decisions at my company.
I check to see if people can solve complex problems.
I don't care what language you know.
You can learn PHP in a couple of hours.
Sure, your first 5.000 SLOC are going to look like whatever language you know best, but right out of college your first 5.000 SLOC are going to suck anyway.Learning a bunch of languages has the advantage that you learn what concepts are universal to programming and what are just entrenched in the language, but what really matters is learning to think algorithmically, no matter how many languages you know, be it one or one thousand.It sounds like you've already made your decision about which school you're attending, you just want some assurance that this education won't be wasted.
Let me assure you that it won't.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669747</id>
	<title>Concepts no, languages no, being a programmer yes</title>
	<author>burni</author>
	<datestamp>1247392980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>1.) Concepts<br>- most said almost nothing to aid<br>CS - are not programmers in the first<br><br>2.) Usage<br><br>ENGINEERING<br><br>If you want to have a look at engineering software which is used to solve numerical problems(FEA,MBS), you most likely will run into the good/bad old<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.....Fortran77/90.<br><br>And Fortran will last longer than you live, even that MSC/Adams tries to jump to a C++ Solver for better code maintainance doesn't mean anything for now - but I suspect a bit more of a market hype, lack of good (future) fortran coders and that C++ Coders are cheaper than their Fortran counterparts,<br>you want to know why ?<br><br>Answer(*)<br>Interfaces and Generics ( the code is too maintainable and you're expandable )<br><br>But yes Fortran is beautifull and ugly at the same time, Fortran is pure code it's no concept, that had to be worked out on beforehand,<br>Fortran is just a way to implement.<br><br>3.) suggestions, from the real (work) life - as a mechanical engineer who has also to be a part-time programmer, and has to look above the fence<br>I would suggest, with given priority except d. - which is the most important skill<br><br>a.)<br>Excel-VBA - a helpfull swiss army knife, when it comes to handle data using a combination of VBA and the functional spreadsheets, this is nearly a must,<br>because if no other tools are available or allowed to use, excel is installed on nearly every office-PC, VBA is easy but the Excelobjectworld has to be<br>learned also.<br><br>b.) choose one but Fortran has the geeky vintage factor on it's side, it's like a 12" vinyl<br><br>Fortran/Pascal - knows Pointers and memory management, imperative, highly structured, teaches "clean" coding.<br><br>c.)<br>F# - functional and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net Plattform,<br>- exotic but very neat<br>- few very good books about, there nearly are no more than those few good, there aren't even bad ones<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)<br>- fast<br><br>d.)<br>be adaptive, be creative, a good programmer must not be the best coder.<br><br>An analytical problem-orientated approach, in combination with creativity and the ability to adapt to new situations are the key abilities to<br>get a good job and to stay in, and using ExcelVBA is also a key ability:<br><br>In short, the program has to evolve in your head, not within the language you implement it in, but you will find Excel everywhere<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D<br><br>Don't take it too serious.<br><br>* it's a JOKE</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
) Concepts- most said almost nothing to aidCS - are not programmers in the first2 .
) UsageENGINEERINGIf you want to have a look at engineering software which is used to solve numerical problems ( FEA,MBS ) , you most likely will run into the good/bad old .....Fortran77/90.And Fortran will last longer than you live , even that MSC/Adams tries to jump to a C + + Solver for better code maintainance does n't mean anything for now - but I suspect a bit more of a market hype , lack of good ( future ) fortran coders and that C + + Coders are cheaper than their Fortran counterparts,you want to know why ? Answer ( * ) Interfaces and Generics ( the code is too maintainable and you 're expandable ) But yes Fortran is beautifull and ugly at the same time , Fortran is pure code it 's no concept , that had to be worked out on beforehand,Fortran is just a way to implement.3 .
) suggestions , from the real ( work ) life - as a mechanical engineer who has also to be a part-time programmer , and has to look above the fenceI would suggest , with given priority except d. - which is the most important skilla .
) Excel-VBA - a helpfull swiss army knife , when it comes to handle data using a combination of VBA and the functional spreadsheets , this is nearly a must,because if no other tools are available or allowed to use , excel is installed on nearly every office-PC , VBA is easy but the Excelobjectworld has to belearned also.b .
) choose one but Fortran has the geeky vintage factor on it 's side , it 's like a 12 " vinylFortran/Pascal - knows Pointers and memory management , imperative , highly structured , teaches " clean " coding.c .
) F # - functional and .net Plattform,- exotic but very neat- few very good books about , there nearly are no more than those few good , there are n't even bad ones ; ) - fastd .
) be adaptive , be creative , a good programmer must not be the best coder.An analytical problem-orientated approach , in combination with creativity and the ability to adapt to new situations are the key abilities toget a good job and to stay in , and using ExcelVBA is also a key ability : In short , the program has to evolve in your head , not within the language you implement it in , but you will find Excel everywhere : DDo n't take it too serious .
* it 's a JOKE</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
) Concepts- most said almost nothing to aidCS - are not programmers in the first2.
) UsageENGINEERINGIf you want to have a look at engineering software which is used to solve numerical problems(FEA,MBS), you most likely will run into the good/bad old .....Fortran77/90.And Fortran will last longer than you live, even that MSC/Adams tries to jump to a C++ Solver for better code maintainance doesn't mean anything for now - but I suspect a bit more of a market hype, lack of good (future) fortran coders and that C++ Coders are cheaper than their Fortran counterparts,you want to know why ?Answer(*)Interfaces and Generics ( the code is too maintainable and you're expandable )But yes Fortran is beautifull and ugly at the same time, Fortran is pure code it's no concept, that had to be worked out on beforehand,Fortran is just a way to implement.3.
) suggestions, from the real (work) life - as a mechanical engineer who has also to be a part-time programmer, and has to look above the fenceI would suggest, with given priority except d. - which is the most important skilla.
)Excel-VBA - a helpfull swiss army knife, when it comes to handle data using a combination of VBA and the functional spreadsheets, this is nearly a must,because if no other tools are available or allowed to use, excel is installed on nearly every office-PC, VBA is easy but the Excelobjectworld has to belearned also.b.
) choose one but Fortran has the geeky vintage factor on it's side, it's like a 12" vinylFortran/Pascal - knows Pointers and memory management, imperative, highly structured, teaches "clean" coding.c.
)F# - functional and .net Plattform,- exotic but very neat- few very good books about, there nearly are no more than those few good, there aren't even bad ones ;)- fastd.
)be adaptive, be creative, a good programmer must not be the best coder.An analytical problem-orientated approach, in combination with creativity and the ability to adapt to new situations are the key abilities toget a good job and to stay in, and using ExcelVBA is also a key ability:In short, the program has to evolve in your head, not within the language you implement it in, but you will find Excel everywhere :DDon't take it too serious.
* it's a JOKE</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671315</id>
	<title>Re:Python is the future</title>
	<author>aynoknman</author>
	<datestamp>1247406840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The world has been going downhill since <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text\_Editor\_and\_Corrector" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">TECO</a> [wikipedia.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>The world has been going downhill since TECO [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The world has been going downhill since TECO [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669153</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>GlassHeart</author>
	<datestamp>1247431560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just as frequently, unfortunately, they turn out people who can't actually program in any of those languages. I think it's very good that a school can teach multiple very different (meaning, not just C/C++/Java) languages, but I also think it's important for a graduate of a 4-year CS degree to be an expert in at least one. To me it's akin to a literature major being able to write very well in one human language.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just as frequently , unfortunately , they turn out people who ca n't actually program in any of those languages .
I think it 's very good that a school can teach multiple very different ( meaning , not just C/C + + /Java ) languages , but I also think it 's important for a graduate of a 4-year CS degree to be an expert in at least one .
To me it 's akin to a literature major being able to write very well in one human language .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just as frequently, unfortunately, they turn out people who can't actually program in any of those languages.
I think it's very good that a school can teach multiple very different (meaning, not just C/C++/Java) languages, but I also think it's important for a graduate of a 4-year CS degree to be an expert in at least one.
To me it's akin to a literature major being able to write very well in one human language.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668967</id>
	<title>Not one but not too many either</title>
	<author>John.P.Jones</author>
	<datestamp>1247429460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You really want just enough to not get too stuck on one language, get good at learning new languages, and understanding different classes of languages.  Beyond that is counter productive.<br>Ideally learning C++ (and C), a garbage collected / reference semantics language (like Java or C#), a modern scripting language (Python, Ruby, or Perl), some exposure to an assembly language (doesn't need to be x86 although mine was) and some exposure to functional languages (ML, Haskell, LISP). This would be a good start, knowing one of these languages really well is a definite plus. At this point you should be able to pick up and adapt to whatever is needed for a project.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You really want just enough to not get too stuck on one language , get good at learning new languages , and understanding different classes of languages .
Beyond that is counter productive.Ideally learning C + + ( and C ) , a garbage collected / reference semantics language ( like Java or C # ) , a modern scripting language ( Python , Ruby , or Perl ) , some exposure to an assembly language ( does n't need to be x86 although mine was ) and some exposure to functional languages ( ML , Haskell , LISP ) .
This would be a good start , knowing one of these languages really well is a definite plus .
At this point you should be able to pick up and adapt to whatever is needed for a project .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You really want just enough to not get too stuck on one language, get good at learning new languages, and understanding different classes of languages.
Beyond that is counter productive.Ideally learning C++ (and C), a garbage collected / reference semantics language (like Java or C#), a modern scripting language (Python, Ruby, or Perl), some exposure to an assembly language (doesn't need to be x86 although mine was) and some exposure to functional languages (ML, Haskell, LISP).
This would be a good start, knowing one of these languages really well is a definite plus.
At this point you should be able to pick up and adapt to whatever is needed for a project.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674029</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>Ben1220</author>
	<datestamp>1247484060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Absolutely.  This is the difference between an average programmer / code monkey and a great programmer.  People don't really see Computer Science as an academic field of knowledge.  It is not learning about how to use computers, its not even about learning how to code, its the chemisty of data, the physics of computation.  Computer Science was developed before computers even existed.  Learning the fundementals of computer science, including algorithms and data structures, automata theory, algorithm analysis, theory of computation, information theory, cluster and grid computing, artificial intelligence, graph theory, combinatorics ect will place you light years ahead of programmers who know only the syntax of a few languages, and believes that counts as computer science.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely .
This is the difference between an average programmer / code monkey and a great programmer .
People do n't really see Computer Science as an academic field of knowledge .
It is not learning about how to use computers , its not even about learning how to code , its the chemisty of data , the physics of computation .
Computer Science was developed before computers even existed .
Learning the fundementals of computer science , including algorithms and data structures , automata theory , algorithm analysis , theory of computation , information theory , cluster and grid computing , artificial intelligence , graph theory , combinatorics ect will place you light years ahead of programmers who know only the syntax of a few languages , and believes that counts as computer science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely.
This is the difference between an average programmer / code monkey and a great programmer.
People don't really see Computer Science as an academic field of knowledge.
It is not learning about how to use computers, its not even about learning how to code, its the chemisty of data, the physics of computation.
Computer Science was developed before computers even existed.
Learning the fundementals of computer science, including algorithms and data structures, automata theory, algorithm analysis, theory of computation, information theory, cluster and grid computing, artificial intelligence, graph theory, combinatorics ect will place you light years ahead of programmers who know only the syntax of a few languages, and believes that counts as computer science.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670041</id>
	<title>Re:Too dumb to realize new school is better</title>
	<author>RomulusNR</author>
	<datestamp>1247394840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good, they're crowding the job market anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good , they 're crowding the job market anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good, they're crowding the job market anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668915</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669041</id>
	<title>Language does not matter. The Algo does.</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1247430000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are, essentially, two kinds of computer languages: Imperative and declarative. Both styles should be taught, as well as their difference, and when to use what.</p><p>What matters is that you learn the <i>theory</i> behind it. The mathematics. The logic. That you learn how to break a problem down to an algorithm (imperative) or how to break it down into terms your language can understand (declarative). What language you use to solve it is a different matter and not really important. You will see, if you know your theory and your logic, that it does not matter whether you implement a problem you plan to solve imperatively in C, Perl, PHP or if you really have to Pascal. It is, essentially, the same. The algorithm you develop will be the same. You will write different code, you will account for the various quirks and requirements the language may have, but they will be few and easily picked up.</p><p>What matters is your algorithm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are , essentially , two kinds of computer languages : Imperative and declarative .
Both styles should be taught , as well as their difference , and when to use what.What matters is that you learn the theory behind it .
The mathematics .
The logic .
That you learn how to break a problem down to an algorithm ( imperative ) or how to break it down into terms your language can understand ( declarative ) .
What language you use to solve it is a different matter and not really important .
You will see , if you know your theory and your logic , that it does not matter whether you implement a problem you plan to solve imperatively in C , Perl , PHP or if you really have to Pascal .
It is , essentially , the same .
The algorithm you develop will be the same .
You will write different code , you will account for the various quirks and requirements the language may have , but they will be few and easily picked up.What matters is your algorithm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are, essentially, two kinds of computer languages: Imperative and declarative.
Both styles should be taught, as well as their difference, and when to use what.What matters is that you learn the theory behind it.
The mathematics.
The logic.
That you learn how to break a problem down to an algorithm (imperative) or how to break it down into terms your language can understand (declarative).
What language you use to solve it is a different matter and not really important.
You will see, if you know your theory and your logic, that it does not matter whether you implement a problem you plan to solve imperatively in C, Perl, PHP or if you really have to Pascal.
It is, essentially, the same.
The algorithm you develop will be the same.
You will write different code, you will account for the various quirks and requirements the language may have, but they will be few and easily picked up.What matters is your algorithm.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670133</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>caywen</author>
	<datestamp>1247395620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huh? I thought Bob Dylan was singing in Chinese all this time. Must have been mistaken!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huh ?
I thought Bob Dylan was singing in Chinese all this time .
Must have been mistaken !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huh?
I thought Bob Dylan was singing in Chinese all this time.
Must have been mistaken!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675339</id>
	<title>Self Investment</title>
	<author>AWG</author>
	<datestamp>1247495820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Expose yourself to as many useful languages as you can. Learn a bit about the (business-wise) useless ones too -- they can still teach you a thing or two. The really important thing to learn in school is the theory of developing systems that work, and doing so as simply and elegantly as possible. Any company worth working for will pick up on that. If you really learned from your CS degree, learning a new language will simply be a study in syntax. For a true nerd, it is easy enough to "master" the nuances of a specific language in your free time; learn as much of the hard stuff in school while you can!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Expose yourself to as many useful languages as you can .
Learn a bit about the ( business-wise ) useless ones too -- they can still teach you a thing or two .
The really important thing to learn in school is the theory of developing systems that work , and doing so as simply and elegantly as possible .
Any company worth working for will pick up on that .
If you really learned from your CS degree , learning a new language will simply be a study in syntax .
For a true nerd , it is easy enough to " master " the nuances of a specific language in your free time ; learn as much of the hard stuff in school while you can !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Expose yourself to as many useful languages as you can.
Learn a bit about the (business-wise) useless ones too -- they can still teach you a thing or two.
The really important thing to learn in school is the theory of developing systems that work, and doing so as simply and elegantly as possible.
Any company worth working for will pick up on that.
If you really learned from your CS degree, learning a new language will simply be a study in syntax.
For a true nerd, it is easy enough to "master" the nuances of a specific language in your free time; learn as much of the hard stuff in school while you can!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672711</id>
	<title>Re:Your school is right</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247421360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is a completely ungrounded answer and an epic fail.</p><p>
&nbsp; Potential employers don't want to "give you a chance" to quickly learn something new. They want to know you can do the job asked for and have the experience in that given area. Telling someone you are a "Java guy" or a "C# guy" will land you more work than any jackoff all trades.  (pun intended)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is a completely ungrounded answer and an epic fail .
  Potential employers do n't want to " give you a chance " to quickly learn something new .
They want to know you can do the job asked for and have the experience in that given area .
Telling someone you are a " Java guy " or a " C # guy " will land you more work than any jackoff all trades .
( pun intended )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is a completely ungrounded answer and an epic fail.
  Potential employers don't want to "give you a chance" to quickly learn something new.
They want to know you can do the job asked for and have the experience in that given area.
Telling someone you are a "Java guy" or a "C# guy" will land you more work than any jackoff all trades.
(pun intended)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675577</id>
	<title>All programming is not equal.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247497020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The OP should realize that software development comes in many flavors (and quite frankly intensities).  To suggest otherwise simply highlights a lack of understanding of software developmet outside of the scope of your own experience.</p><p>To suggest the C# is a prime candidate for scientific modeling, firmware development, visualzation, etc... is just as ridiculous as offering up C/C++ as a candidate for developing a line of business web-based application.  Different types of software development have different applicable tool sets.  What would be chosen in one context, may not be chosen in another.   I would not begin to suggest which type of software development is "superior," although I'm sure there are those that would try to tell you that one is over another.  The challenges that one team may face may be wholy different than another.  Some types of development call for a higher level of technical aptitude which a more business oriented developer may find themselves ill-equipped for.  In the same fashion, some business situations may find a highly technical programmer scrambling to cope with the requirements for business knowledge and certain soft skills.</p><p>The OP should give good thought to the type of work they want to do as a CS degree may not even be the route you want to take.  If, however, CS is thr proper route for you, I think your institution has the right idea as any good program should be putting the emphasis on these types of concepts and less on the actual implementation.  Anyone I know that is worth their salt as a programmer or developer will tell you that the language is largely irrelevant.  I've seen fantastic developers take on projects implemented in technologies they don't even know and not break stride.  Once you know the fundamental concepts behind software development, I think you'll find that any language's syntax and feature set is only a quick read through a book away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The OP should realize that software development comes in many flavors ( and quite frankly intensities ) .
To suggest otherwise simply highlights a lack of understanding of software developmet outside of the scope of your own experience.To suggest the C # is a prime candidate for scientific modeling , firmware development , visualzation , etc... is just as ridiculous as offering up C/C + + as a candidate for developing a line of business web-based application .
Different types of software development have different applicable tool sets .
What would be chosen in one context , may not be chosen in another .
I would not begin to suggest which type of software development is " superior , " although I 'm sure there are those that would try to tell you that one is over another .
The challenges that one team may face may be wholy different than another .
Some types of development call for a higher level of technical aptitude which a more business oriented developer may find themselves ill-equipped for .
In the same fashion , some business situations may find a highly technical programmer scrambling to cope with the requirements for business knowledge and certain soft skills.The OP should give good thought to the type of work they want to do as a CS degree may not even be the route you want to take .
If , however , CS is thr proper route for you , I think your institution has the right idea as any good program should be putting the emphasis on these types of concepts and less on the actual implementation .
Anyone I know that is worth their salt as a programmer or developer will tell you that the language is largely irrelevant .
I 've seen fantastic developers take on projects implemented in technologies they do n't even know and not break stride .
Once you know the fundamental concepts behind software development , I think you 'll find that any language 's syntax and feature set is only a quick read through a book away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The OP should realize that software development comes in many flavors (and quite frankly intensities).
To suggest otherwise simply highlights a lack of understanding of software developmet outside of the scope of your own experience.To suggest the C# is a prime candidate for scientific modeling, firmware development, visualzation, etc... is just as ridiculous as offering up C/C++ as a candidate for developing a line of business web-based application.
Different types of software development have different applicable tool sets.
What would be chosen in one context, may not be chosen in another.
I would not begin to suggest which type of software development is "superior," although I'm sure there are those that would try to tell you that one is over another.
The challenges that one team may face may be wholy different than another.
Some types of development call for a higher level of technical aptitude which a more business oriented developer may find themselves ill-equipped for.
In the same fashion, some business situations may find a highly technical programmer scrambling to cope with the requirements for business knowledge and certain soft skills.The OP should give good thought to the type of work they want to do as a CS degree may not even be the route you want to take.
If, however, CS is thr proper route for you, I think your institution has the right idea as any good program should be putting the emphasis on these types of concepts and less on the actual implementation.
Anyone I know that is worth their salt as a programmer or developer will tell you that the language is largely irrelevant.
I've seen fantastic developers take on projects implemented in technologies they don't even know and not break stride.
Once you know the fundamental concepts behind software development, I think you'll find that any language's syntax and feature set is only a quick read through a book away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672791</id>
	<title>Languages are easy to learn</title>
	<author>\_Shad0w\_</author>
	<datestamp>1247422680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd far rather someone knew how to program, than knew the specifics of a given language.  Languages can be learnt as needed fairly easily; the skills required to design and implement good software are a lot harder to pick up, they're foundation that you build on top of.</p><p>Courses that spend more time teaching you how to program than teaching you how to program in a given language seem like rather a good thing to me, especially given the language du jour is going to keep changing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd far rather someone knew how to program , than knew the specifics of a given language .
Languages can be learnt as needed fairly easily ; the skills required to design and implement good software are a lot harder to pick up , they 're foundation that you build on top of.Courses that spend more time teaching you how to program than teaching you how to program in a given language seem like rather a good thing to me , especially given the language du jour is going to keep changing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd far rather someone knew how to program, than knew the specifics of a given language.
Languages can be learnt as needed fairly easily; the skills required to design and implement good software are a lot harder to pick up, they're foundation that you build on top of.Courses that spend more time teaching you how to program than teaching you how to program in a given language seem like rather a good thing to me, especially given the language du jour is going to keep changing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670065</id>
	<title>that's why they call it *experience*</title>
	<author>toby</author>
	<datestamp>1247395020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It sounds like you want your school to make you into the next<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET code monkey off the conveyor belt.</p><p>If that's what you want, why are you studying Computer Science at all? It is not about giving you expertise in specific tools.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It sounds like you want your school to make you into the next .NET code monkey off the conveyor belt.If that 's what you want , why are you studying Computer Science at all ?
It is not about giving you expertise in specific tools .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It sounds like you want your school to make you into the next .NET code monkey off the conveyor belt.If that's what you want, why are you studying Computer Science at all?
It is not about giving you expertise in specific tools.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669427</id>
	<title>CS is not a 'Learn Java in 24 Months' course</title>
	<author>nOw2</author>
	<datestamp>1247390400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Language is irrelevent to a computer science degree. CS is about concepts, and bringing new ideas into the world. Once you understand CS, languages are easy. I've not yet taken on a full-time job where I already knew the primary language I'd be using, but was able to demonstrate to the (thankfully clued up managers) that I was capable of picking it up.

If you're more interested in the specifics of learning programming in specific techologies and methodologies, get a software engineering degree. If you want to go into consulting, engineering is also better - but you must have experience for consulting.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Language is irrelevent to a computer science degree .
CS is about concepts , and bringing new ideas into the world .
Once you understand CS , languages are easy .
I 've not yet taken on a full-time job where I already knew the primary language I 'd be using , but was able to demonstrate to the ( thankfully clued up managers ) that I was capable of picking it up .
If you 're more interested in the specifics of learning programming in specific techologies and methodologies , get a software engineering degree .
If you want to go into consulting , engineering is also better - but you must have experience for consulting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Language is irrelevent to a computer science degree.
CS is about concepts, and bringing new ideas into the world.
Once you understand CS, languages are easy.
I've not yet taken on a full-time job where I already knew the primary language I'd be using, but was able to demonstrate to the (thankfully clued up managers) that I was capable of picking it up.
If you're more interested in the specifics of learning programming in specific techologies and methodologies, get a software engineering degree.
If you want to go into consulting, engineering is also better - but you must have experience for consulting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671349</id>
	<title>Concept will win out</title>
	<author>Sedennial</author>
	<datestamp>1247407140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you understand the concepts for logic, iterative problem solving and analysis, and the fundamentals of <i>how</i> modular, linear, and OOP programming work, and when to apply which type of design, you can learn the intricacy's of any language. I'd rather work with a someone who is generally familiar with a dozen 'languages' but understands and can apply the above fundamentals, than someone who can whip out an entire application + GUI in C# or Mono but can't break a problem down into it's component parts and if confronted with a PERL application gets a blank stare and says "What's this?" instead of "Give me enough time and I can figure this out!".</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you understand the concepts for logic , iterative problem solving and analysis , and the fundamentals of how modular , linear , and OOP programming work , and when to apply which type of design , you can learn the intricacy 's of any language .
I 'd rather work with a someone who is generally familiar with a dozen 'languages ' but understands and can apply the above fundamentals , than someone who can whip out an entire application + GUI in C # or Mono but ca n't break a problem down into it 's component parts and if confronted with a PERL application gets a blank stare and says " What 's this ?
" instead of " Give me enough time and I can figure this out !
" .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you understand the concepts for logic, iterative problem solving and analysis, and the fundamentals of how modular, linear, and OOP programming work, and when to apply which type of design, you can learn the intricacy's of any language.
I'd rather work with a someone who is generally familiar with a dozen 'languages' but understands and can apply the above fundamentals, than someone who can whip out an entire application + GUI in C# or Mono but can't break a problem down into it's component parts and if confronted with a PERL application gets a blank stare and says "What's this?
" instead of "Give me enough time and I can figure this out!
".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669247</id>
	<title>You are in a CIS program, not a true CS</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1247431860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>CompSci does not worry about a language. Instead, they teach abstraction around a base language, and will have one to two classes concerning different language  (comparative languages). The problem is that languages popularity's change. What you want is fundamentals, and skip the garbage about what language de jour. Go with a program that uses a single language (the ACM base language is java, though it was C++ and before than it was pascal).</htmltext>
<tokenext>CompSci does not worry about a language .
Instead , they teach abstraction around a base language , and will have one to two classes concerning different language ( comparative languages ) .
The problem is that languages popularity 's change .
What you want is fundamentals , and skip the garbage about what language de jour .
Go with a program that uses a single language ( the ACM base language is java , though it was C + + and before than it was pascal ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CompSci does not worry about a language.
Instead, they teach abstraction around a base language, and will have one to two classes concerning different language  (comparative languages).
The problem is that languages popularity's change.
What you want is fundamentals, and skip the garbage about what language de jour.
Go with a program that uses a single language (the ACM base language is java, though it was C++ and before than it was pascal).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677859</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>DuckDodgers</author>
	<datestamp>1247505300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is C typed?  I thought C was "cast it however you want and go".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is C typed ?
I thought C was " cast it however you want and go " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is C typed?
I thought C was "cast it however you want and go".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675267</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675349</id>
	<title>Stick with your CS degree</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247495880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Turing machines, finite state automata, asymptotic time complexities, proof by smallest counter-example using the Well Ordering Principle.. mmm that's the good stuff!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Turing machines , finite state automata , asymptotic time complexities , proof by smallest counter-example using the Well Ordering Principle.. mmm that 's the good stuff !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Turing machines, finite state automata, asymptotic time complexities, proof by smallest counter-example using the Well Ordering Principle.. mmm that's the good stuff!
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672241</id>
	<title>Its the fundamentals, stupid!</title>
	<author>Jahz</author>
	<datestamp>1247415600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Concepts are what is important.  Concepts are what separate skilled engineers from the common coder.  Languages are tools which change often, but the fundamentals are generally constant.</p><p>I finished college with a healthy working knowledge of C and Java from academic and side projects.  I had become extremely proficient in  Perl and I also had a year of internship experience in C++.  I interviewed for jobs focusing on all of those languages.  My favorite was Perl, and I eventually accepted a position which dealt primarily a project that was Perl-based.   Six months later I had to do a fairly complex Java project (lasted 3 months).  Immediately after that I started a year long project in Objective-C, a language which I had absolutely no knowledge of.  Now I hardly code Perl (I miss it, but I do not mind Obj-C much... I'm quite proficient in it by now).</p><p>The point is you never know where life will take you.  I can attest from experience that switching to a completely foreign language stinks.  It can be very rough initially, but if your fundamentals are strong, you'll have something to lean on instead of falling down.  Not to mention that a generalist is an extremely valuable position to be seen in by your boss.</p><p>It's important to know languages, but they are secondary to mastering the fundamental concepts that you'll take with you for your entire career.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Concepts are what is important .
Concepts are what separate skilled engineers from the common coder .
Languages are tools which change often , but the fundamentals are generally constant.I finished college with a healthy working knowledge of C and Java from academic and side projects .
I had become extremely proficient in Perl and I also had a year of internship experience in C + + .
I interviewed for jobs focusing on all of those languages .
My favorite was Perl , and I eventually accepted a position which dealt primarily a project that was Perl-based .
Six months later I had to do a fairly complex Java project ( lasted 3 months ) .
Immediately after that I started a year long project in Objective-C , a language which I had absolutely no knowledge of .
Now I hardly code Perl ( I miss it , but I do not mind Obj-C much... I 'm quite proficient in it by now ) .The point is you never know where life will take you .
I can attest from experience that switching to a completely foreign language stinks .
It can be very rough initially , but if your fundamentals are strong , you 'll have something to lean on instead of falling down .
Not to mention that a generalist is an extremely valuable position to be seen in by your boss.It 's important to know languages , but they are secondary to mastering the fundamental concepts that you 'll take with you for your entire career .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Concepts are what is important.
Concepts are what separate skilled engineers from the common coder.
Languages are tools which change often, but the fundamentals are generally constant.I finished college with a healthy working knowledge of C and Java from academic and side projects.
I had become extremely proficient in  Perl and I also had a year of internship experience in C++.
I interviewed for jobs focusing on all of those languages.
My favorite was Perl, and I eventually accepted a position which dealt primarily a project that was Perl-based.
Six months later I had to do a fairly complex Java project (lasted 3 months).
Immediately after that I started a year long project in Objective-C, a language which I had absolutely no knowledge of.
Now I hardly code Perl (I miss it, but I do not mind Obj-C much... I'm quite proficient in it by now).The point is you never know where life will take you.
I can attest from experience that switching to a completely foreign language stinks.
It can be very rough initially, but if your fundamentals are strong, you'll have something to lean on instead of falling down.
Not to mention that a generalist is an extremely valuable position to be seen in by your boss.It's important to know languages, but they are secondary to mastering the fundamental concepts that you'll take with you for your entire career.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671783</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>Veggiesama</author>
	<datestamp>1247411100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>Learn about... bubble sort...</i> </p><p>No, don't. Seriously. If you are at all capable, then *forget* about bubble sort. Erase it from your mind, with surgery if need be.</p></div><p>Even Obama knows that one.</p><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nnj7r1wCD4" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nnj7r1wCD4</a> [youtube.com] @ 7:10</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Learn about... bubble sort... No , do n't .
Seriously. If you are at all capable , then * forget * about bubble sort .
Erase it from your mind , with surgery if need be.Even Obama knows that one.http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 1nnj7r1wCD4 [ youtube.com ] @ 7 : 10</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Learn about... bubble sort... No, don't.
Seriously. If you are at all capable, then *forget* about bubble sort.
Erase it from your mind, with surgery if need be.Even Obama knows that one.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nnj7r1wCD4 [youtube.com] @ 7:10
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669953</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28682127</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247477460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd be less concerned with someone who didn't know it than someone who could figure it out when necessary. Ditching a plane in the ocean? Yah, he learned that in his spare time. You can sit around all day figuring out the perfect requirements but the fact is that it's far more important that they will learn on their own or learn on the job than knowing some bullshit in advance just because.</p><p>After all, as a programmer, 80\% of a job is shit you won't know in advance anyway. What matters is how you work through the problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd be less concerned with someone who did n't know it than someone who could figure it out when necessary .
Ditching a plane in the ocean ?
Yah , he learned that in his spare time .
You can sit around all day figuring out the perfect requirements but the fact is that it 's far more important that they will learn on their own or learn on the job than knowing some bullshit in advance just because.After all , as a programmer , 80 \ % of a job is shit you wo n't know in advance anyway .
What matters is how you work through the problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd be less concerned with someone who didn't know it than someone who could figure it out when necessary.
Ditching a plane in the ocean?
Yah, he learned that in his spare time.
You can sit around all day figuring out the perfect requirements but the fact is that it's far more important that they will learn on their own or learn on the job than knowing some bullshit in advance just because.After all, as a programmer, 80\% of a job is shit you won't know in advance anyway.
What matters is how you work through the problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669491</id>
	<title>How to become a UberG33k</title>
	<author>Hairy1</author>
	<datestamp>1247391000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In order to answer questions about this general problem of how to become an UberG33k I have prepared the following video.<br><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhz-RdohR8U" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhz-RdohR8U</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In order to answer questions about this general problem of how to become an UberG33k I have prepared the following video.http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = jhz-RdohR8U [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In order to answer questions about this general problem of how to become an UberG33k I have prepared the following video.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhz-RdohR8U [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671793</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>scumdamn</author>
	<datestamp>1247411220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Tell me about it. I got thrown into the deep end in my first programming gig and there was SQL involved. The C# and Asp.Net parts were simple. The SQL and figuring out what the hell the people were doing who I took the site over from were the difficult parts.
The FUN part was learning XSLT and replacing all those damn asp:Repeater controls with it. I love opening up a blank XSL file and starting on it for some reason. That's the really fun stuff.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tell me about it .
I got thrown into the deep end in my first programming gig and there was SQL involved .
The C # and Asp.Net parts were simple .
The SQL and figuring out what the hell the people were doing who I took the site over from were the difficult parts .
The FUN part was learning XSLT and replacing all those damn asp : Repeater controls with it .
I love opening up a blank XSL file and starting on it for some reason .
That 's the really fun stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tell me about it.
I got thrown into the deep end in my first programming gig and there was SQL involved.
The C# and Asp.Net parts were simple.
The SQL and figuring out what the hell the people were doing who I took the site over from were the difficult parts.
The FUN part was learning XSLT and replacing all those damn asp:Repeater controls with it.
I love opening up a blank XSL file and starting on it for some reason.
That's the really fun stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670311</id>
	<title>Re:Algorithms and Data Structures</title>
	<author>godrik</author>
	<datestamp>1247397300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They won't understand. It is not a slashdot car analogy (TM).</htmltext>
<tokenext>They wo n't understand .
It is not a slashdot car analogy ( TM ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They won't understand.
It is not a slashdot car analogy (TM).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674369</id>
	<title>How long are language courses?</title>
	<author>jotaeleemeese</author>
	<datestamp>1247488320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1 week.</p><p>2 weeks if one is really dumb.</p><p>Do you want that narrow aspect of your education to have such a decisive way in your future?</p><p>I would have been elated to have learned more languages when I was in Uni.</p><p>What is wrong with you!?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 week.2 weeks if one is really dumb.Do you want that narrow aspect of your education to have such a decisive way in your future ? I would have been elated to have learned more languages when I was in Uni.What is wrong with you !
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1 week.2 weeks if one is really dumb.Do you want that narrow aspect of your education to have such a decisive way in your future?I would have been elated to have learned more languages when I was in Uni.What is wrong with you!
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670391</id>
	<title>Boring question.</title>
	<author>godrik</author>
	<datestamp>1247397900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We are having the very same question each quarter with the very same answer. Can the editors point the submitters to an other very similar thread instead of putting this on the main page of the best news website ever ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>We are having the very same question each quarter with the very same answer .
Can the editors point the submitters to an other very similar thread instead of putting this on the main page of the best news website ever ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are having the very same question each quarter with the very same answer.
Can the editors point the submitters to an other very similar thread instead of putting this on the main page of the best news website ever ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668915</id>
	<title>Too dumb to realize new school is better</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247429100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>New school teaches every language + programmming concepts and our poster complains - maybe the new gen kids are unteachable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>New school teaches every language + programmming concepts and our poster complains - maybe the new gen kids are unteachable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New school teaches every language + programmming concepts and our poster complains - maybe the new gen kids are unteachable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28687029</id>
	<title>Re:You should be asking a different question</title>
	<author>Thundarr Trollgrim</author>
	<datestamp>1247510880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Try to avoid QA... On my first (and only) decent programming job after doing a Computer Science degree, after a few months, I was forced to do mindless QA for 2 months... It was so mind-numbingly boring I got fired for laziness. Now I work in a call centre<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Try to avoid QA... On my first ( and only ) decent programming job after doing a Computer Science degree , after a few months , I was forced to do mindless QA for 2 months... It was so mind-numbingly boring I got fired for laziness .
Now I work in a call centre ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try to avoid QA... On my first (and only) decent programming job after doing a Computer Science degree, after a few months, I was forced to do mindless QA for 2 months... It was so mind-numbingly boring I got fired for laziness.
Now I work in a call centre ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669087</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668997</id>
	<title>HUH?!?</title>
	<author>certain death</author>
	<datestamp>1247429700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Are Bash and Oracle really programming languages?!?  I would consider that more of a scripting language, and SQL.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Are Bash and Oracle really programming languages ? ! ?
I would consider that more of a scripting language , and SQL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are Bash and Oracle really programming languages?!?
I would consider that more of a scripting language, and SQL.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670565</id>
	<title>Your employer won't value it anyway</title>
	<author>heironymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247399460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your future employer won't really believe that you are competent in language X anyway, until you have programmed in it professionally for about a year.  So, don't worry about being seen as a newbie when you are fresh out of school -- you are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your future employer wo n't really believe that you are competent in language X anyway , until you have programmed in it professionally for about a year .
So , do n't worry about being seen as a newbie when you are fresh out of school -- you are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your future employer won't really believe that you are competent in language X anyway, until you have programmed in it professionally for about a year.
So, don't worry about being seen as a newbie when you are fresh out of school -- you are.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28678163</id>
	<title>Re:Any Language in a storm......</title>
	<author>Tetsujin</author>
	<datestamp>1247506140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>University does *not* teach you to program. Employers know (or should know) this, so don't worry about that.</p></div><p>More importantly, I think, students should understand this.  Looking back I feel like it's really important to not only learn what the classes teach you, but use your free time (if you've got some) to actually <em>use</em> that education...  Write programs that have some relevance outside the classroom.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>My gut feeling is that the more languages you learn, the less you are locked into one way of thinking.</p></div><p>Depends on the languages, I think.  Languages like PHP or Bash don't really <em>teach</em> you anything, IMO - they're just useful, fairly domain-specific languages.  Others, like Perl or Python, or even Java, are less domain-specific but <em>also</em> don't teach you much - they mostly just serve as comfortable environments in which to write code.</p><p>The point where learning other programming languages help snap you out of one-track thinking is where the language itself encourages a different way of thinking about problems...  So I'd say there should definitely be classes along the way that deal in functional languages - and I think it's definitely worth exploring other languages as well (Erlang comes to mind...)  But remember that it's the class, not the language used in the class, that teaches you what you need to know.  Writing some programs in Scheme doesn't make you a functional programmer...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>University does * not * teach you to program .
Employers know ( or should know ) this , so do n't worry about that.More importantly , I think , students should understand this .
Looking back I feel like it 's really important to not only learn what the classes teach you , but use your free time ( if you 've got some ) to actually use that education... Write programs that have some relevance outside the classroom.My gut feeling is that the more languages you learn , the less you are locked into one way of thinking.Depends on the languages , I think .
Languages like PHP or Bash do n't really teach you anything , IMO - they 're just useful , fairly domain-specific languages .
Others , like Perl or Python , or even Java , are less domain-specific but also do n't teach you much - they mostly just serve as comfortable environments in which to write code.The point where learning other programming languages help snap you out of one-track thinking is where the language itself encourages a different way of thinking about problems... So I 'd say there should definitely be classes along the way that deal in functional languages - and I think it 's definitely worth exploring other languages as well ( Erlang comes to mind... ) But remember that it 's the class , not the language used in the class , that teaches you what you need to know .
Writing some programs in Scheme does n't make you a functional programmer.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>University does *not* teach you to program.
Employers know (or should know) this, so don't worry about that.More importantly, I think, students should understand this.
Looking back I feel like it's really important to not only learn what the classes teach you, but use your free time (if you've got some) to actually use that education...  Write programs that have some relevance outside the classroom.My gut feeling is that the more languages you learn, the less you are locked into one way of thinking.Depends on the languages, I think.
Languages like PHP or Bash don't really teach you anything, IMO - they're just useful, fairly domain-specific languages.
Others, like Perl or Python, or even Java, are less domain-specific but also don't teach you much - they mostly just serve as comfortable environments in which to write code.The point where learning other programming languages help snap you out of one-track thinking is where the language itself encourages a different way of thinking about problems...  So I'd say there should definitely be classes along the way that deal in functional languages - and I think it's definitely worth exploring other languages as well (Erlang comes to mind...)  But remember that it's the class, not the language used in the class, that teaches you what you need to know.
Writing some programs in Scheme doesn't make you a functional programmer...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669439</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673483</id>
	<title>Different Paths Same Destination</title>
	<author>servognome</author>
	<datestamp>1247475960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Bob Dylan is not famous for knowing English grammar and spelling. He is famous for what he does with them. Teach him Chinese, and he can most likely make amazing songs in Chinese as well.</p></div></blockquote><p>There is a difference between an intimate understanding and just translating the words.  Dylan was great because he mastered the English language to not just follow the rules, but bend and break them - "When you ain't got nothing, you got nothing to lose."<br>Every programming language has it's own little <a href="http://www.ddj.com/cpp/184401996" title="ddj.com">quirks</a> [ddj.com] that must be navigated.  High level concepts may translate across languages, however, the most elegant implementation is often derived from experience.<br> <br>Different skill sets can be applied to the same problem and come up with different solutions that work.  There is no perfect curriculum for a particular job, success ultimately depends on how well one adapts their toolset to meet the needs of a particular task.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bob Dylan is not famous for knowing English grammar and spelling .
He is famous for what he does with them .
Teach him Chinese , and he can most likely make amazing songs in Chinese as well.There is a difference between an intimate understanding and just translating the words .
Dylan was great because he mastered the English language to not just follow the rules , but bend and break them - " When you ai n't got nothing , you got nothing to lose .
" Every programming language has it 's own little quirks [ ddj.com ] that must be navigated .
High level concepts may translate across languages , however , the most elegant implementation is often derived from experience .
Different skill sets can be applied to the same problem and come up with different solutions that work .
There is no perfect curriculum for a particular job , success ultimately depends on how well one adapts their toolset to meet the needs of a particular task .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bob Dylan is not famous for knowing English grammar and spelling.
He is famous for what he does with them.
Teach him Chinese, and he can most likely make amazing songs in Chinese as well.There is a difference between an intimate understanding and just translating the words.
Dylan was great because he mastered the English language to not just follow the rules, but bend and break them - "When you ain't got nothing, you got nothing to lose.
"Every programming language has it's own little quirks [ddj.com] that must be navigated.
High level concepts may translate across languages, however, the most elegant implementation is often derived from experience.
Different skill sets can be applied to the same problem and come up with different solutions that work.
There is no perfect curriculum for a particular job, success ultimately depends on how well one adapts their toolset to meet the needs of a particular task.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28700525</id>
	<title>Re:Find another major</title>
	<author>epee1221</author>
	<datestamp>1247597460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> things that are the complete opposite of what you found interesting and intellectually stimulating about computer science when you enrolled</p></div></blockquote><p>There's always grad school.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>things that are the complete opposite of what you found interesting and intellectually stimulating about computer science when you enrolledThere 's always grad school .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> things that are the complete opposite of what you found interesting and intellectually stimulating about computer science when you enrolledThere's always grad school.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669203</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668971</id>
	<title>Learning a language is easy</title>
	<author>LBArrettAnderson</author>
	<datestamp>1247429460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Learning a language is easy.  It doesn't take a degree to be able to program in C++ or any other language.  That's not what schools should be teaching (at least after the first couple of courses).
<br> <br>
As everyone else has said, it's the concepts that are important.  It's not unheard of for a software company that develops only in language X will hire someone who has never used that language before.  It doesn't take long at all to get familiar with a new language once you already know a few.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Learning a language is easy .
It does n't take a degree to be able to program in C + + or any other language .
That 's not what schools should be teaching ( at least after the first couple of courses ) .
As everyone else has said , it 's the concepts that are important .
It 's not unheard of for a software company that develops only in language X will hire someone who has never used that language before .
It does n't take long at all to get familiar with a new language once you already know a few .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Learning a language is easy.
It doesn't take a degree to be able to program in C++ or any other language.
That's not what schools should be teaching (at least after the first couple of courses).
As everyone else has said, it's the concepts that are important.
It's not unheard of for a software company that develops only in language X will hire someone who has never used that language before.
It doesn't take long at all to get familiar with a new language once you already know a few.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28678187</id>
	<title>Re:Does it really matter?</title>
	<author>dubbreak</author>
	<datestamp>1247506200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly.<br> <br>
At the university I attended the professors chose what language to teach the courses in. In some cases you could choose what language to do the assignments in (numerical methods I could use any language as long as the first assignment was done in Matlab.. I chose Octave for most, but for a few Perl was quicker. Some people wrote java.. of course their code was 3 times as long, but that's what they felt comfortable in). <br> <br>
While I didn't come out of school particularly competent in any language (a nice smathering of C,C++, Java, Perl, Lisp, ML etc), I came out confident I could learn any language I needed to quickly. My first real programming job (quite recent, I was a business analyst previously), I had to pick up delphi (objective pascal basically). Two days tearing through the codebase and I was up and running doing bug fixes and adding new features. Within a month I had written some new code (dll) ground up. Then we moved to C# for all new code. Easy enough. Read a few gotchas written for java and c++ coders and I was good to go...<br> <br>
My point being. Language doesn't matter. You are going to have to learn new languages. That's the industry. You need a solid base of theory and the language is just how you express what you already know. It's like an artist working in different mediums. A good artist should be able to use any medium. They may prefer one or two, but asked to create something in any medium it shouldn't be a big deal.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
At the university I attended the professors chose what language to teach the courses in .
In some cases you could choose what language to do the assignments in ( numerical methods I could use any language as long as the first assignment was done in Matlab.. I chose Octave for most , but for a few Perl was quicker .
Some people wrote java.. of course their code was 3 times as long , but that 's what they felt comfortable in ) .
While I did n't come out of school particularly competent in any language ( a nice smathering of C,C + + , Java , Perl , Lisp , ML etc ) , I came out confident I could learn any language I needed to quickly .
My first real programming job ( quite recent , I was a business analyst previously ) , I had to pick up delphi ( objective pascal basically ) .
Two days tearing through the codebase and I was up and running doing bug fixes and adding new features .
Within a month I had written some new code ( dll ) ground up .
Then we moved to C # for all new code .
Easy enough .
Read a few gotchas written for java and c + + coders and I was good to go.. . My point being .
Language does n't matter .
You are going to have to learn new languages .
That 's the industry .
You need a solid base of theory and the language is just how you express what you already know .
It 's like an artist working in different mediums .
A good artist should be able to use any medium .
They may prefer one or two , but asked to create something in any medium it should n't be a big deal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
At the university I attended the professors chose what language to teach the courses in.
In some cases you could choose what language to do the assignments in (numerical methods I could use any language as long as the first assignment was done in Matlab.. I chose Octave for most, but for a few Perl was quicker.
Some people wrote java.. of course their code was 3 times as long, but that's what they felt comfortable in).
While I didn't come out of school particularly competent in any language (a nice smathering of C,C++, Java, Perl, Lisp, ML etc), I came out confident I could learn any language I needed to quickly.
My first real programming job (quite recent, I was a business analyst previously), I had to pick up delphi (objective pascal basically).
Two days tearing through the codebase and I was up and running doing bug fixes and adding new features.
Within a month I had written some new code (dll) ground up.
Then we moved to C# for all new code.
Easy enough.
Read a few gotchas written for java and c++ coders and I was good to go... 
My point being.
Language doesn't matter.
You are going to have to learn new languages.
That's the industry.
You need a solid base of theory and the language is just how you express what you already know.
It's like an artist working in different mediums.
A good artist should be able to use any medium.
They may prefer one or two, but asked to create something in any medium it shouldn't be a big deal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668891</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675843</id>
	<title>Too late</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247498220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It doesn't matter which langauge / methodology / whatever you do in your course. Its VERY HARD to get any job at the moment - in case you have not noticed.</p><p>You will be very lucky to land any position other above graduate level - and employers (mostly) know this means you are only now going to start learning how to do stuff in the real world. If you really want to work in software you would be better to stop worrying about the content of your course and get yourself out there working voluntary part-time and making some contacts / good impressions / experience.</p><p>If you wait till you are finished it will probably be too late.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It does n't matter which langauge / methodology / whatever you do in your course .
Its VERY HARD to get any job at the moment - in case you have not noticed.You will be very lucky to land any position other above graduate level - and employers ( mostly ) know this means you are only now going to start learning how to do stuff in the real world .
If you really want to work in software you would be better to stop worrying about the content of your course and get yourself out there working voluntary part-time and making some contacts / good impressions / experience.If you wait till you are finished it will probably be too late .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It doesn't matter which langauge / methodology / whatever you do in your course.
Its VERY HARD to get any job at the moment - in case you have not noticed.You will be very lucky to land any position other above graduate level - and employers (mostly) know this means you are only now going to start learning how to do stuff in the real world.
If you really want to work in software you would be better to stop worrying about the content of your course and get yourself out there working voluntary part-time and making some contacts / good impressions / experience.If you wait till you are finished it will probably be too late.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670003</id>
	<title>Doesn't really matter</title>
	<author>bobasaurus</author>
	<datestamp>1247394600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I was in college, once you reached the senior level Computer Science classes, you were allowed to use any language you like to complete various projects for each course.  Most people chose Java, since it was taught in earlier classes, but I explored around a bit in C#, and sometimes submitted projects in multiple languages just for fun.  I even wrote a crappy zelda-like game entirely in JavaScript for a web languages class.  It really comes down to applying general concepts like MVC GUI design with event handling, threading, network communication, file reading/writing, XML, and algorithms.  Once you can use these concepts for one language, the transition to a new one is relatively simple.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I was in college , once you reached the senior level Computer Science classes , you were allowed to use any language you like to complete various projects for each course .
Most people chose Java , since it was taught in earlier classes , but I explored around a bit in C # , and sometimes submitted projects in multiple languages just for fun .
I even wrote a crappy zelda-like game entirely in JavaScript for a web languages class .
It really comes down to applying general concepts like MVC GUI design with event handling , threading , network communication , file reading/writing , XML , and algorithms .
Once you can use these concepts for one language , the transition to a new one is relatively simple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I was in college, once you reached the senior level Computer Science classes, you were allowed to use any language you like to complete various projects for each course.
Most people chose Java, since it was taught in earlier classes, but I explored around a bit in C#, and sometimes submitted projects in multiple languages just for fun.
I even wrote a crappy zelda-like game entirely in JavaScript for a web languages class.
It really comes down to applying general concepts like MVC GUI design with event handling, threading, network communication, file reading/writing, XML, and algorithms.
Once you can use these concepts for one language, the transition to a new one is relatively simple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668925</id>
	<title>Re:Go to a "trade school" for that. Not a universi</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247429160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They shouldn't teach any language. Seriously. Maybe a hypothetical one like MIX or MMIX, but not an actual language.</p><p>They should teach math instead.</p></div><p>That's just silly.  It's true that the school should focus on theory first and implementation second, but you certainly don't want to graduate with a CIS degree never having used a C++ compiler or written an entire program from start to finish.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They should n't teach any language .
Seriously. Maybe a hypothetical one like MIX or MMIX , but not an actual language.They should teach math instead.That 's just silly .
It 's true that the school should focus on theory first and implementation second , but you certainly do n't want to graduate with a CIS degree never having used a C + + compiler or written an entire program from start to finish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They shouldn't teach any language.
Seriously. Maybe a hypothetical one like MIX or MMIX, but not an actual language.They should teach math instead.That's just silly.
It's true that the school should focus on theory first and implementation second, but you certainly don't want to graduate with a CIS degree never having used a C++ compiler or written an entire program from start to finish.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669457</id>
	<title>Re:Go to a "trade school" for that. Not a universi</title>
	<author>EastCoastSurfer</author>
	<datestamp>1247390640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree!</p><p>Except for the first 2 intro CS courses my school didn't teach any languages.  The classes were all about concepts.  The teacher would show up and say we were using X language, maybe give some pointers to websites about the language, and then expect the students to figure out the language aspect on their own.</p><p>I took an OpenGL graphics programming elective and the teacher didn't care what language we used as long as it had OGL bindings and a linux compiler/interpreter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree ! Except for the first 2 intro CS courses my school did n't teach any languages .
The classes were all about concepts .
The teacher would show up and say we were using X language , maybe give some pointers to websites about the language , and then expect the students to figure out the language aspect on their own.I took an OpenGL graphics programming elective and the teacher did n't care what language we used as long as it had OGL bindings and a linux compiler/interpreter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree!Except for the first 2 intro CS courses my school didn't teach any languages.
The classes were all about concepts.
The teacher would show up and say we were using X language, maybe give some pointers to websites about the language, and then expect the students to figure out the language aspect on their own.I took an OpenGL graphics programming elective and the teacher didn't care what language we used as long as it had OGL bindings and a linux compiler/interpreter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670359</id>
	<title>abstract away from languages!</title>
	<author>Zargg</author>
	<datestamp>1247397660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I remember my first year of college, I heard a lot of the students talking about how useless the first class was because we were being taught COMPONENT PASCAL! Obviously, this doesn't appeal to the job market very much, which is what they were upset about, but it was a GREAT first language. It is so simple and easy to read that the professor simply used it to teach basics like loops, recursion, pointers, and object oriented programming, aka the THEORY behind the algorithms. I loved this approach, even though it had little bearing in the job market, because when we moved on to other languages, it was easy to abstract away that specific languages syntax and semantics, and really just get to the heart of the problem.

By the end of the major, students learned component pascal, c++, java, lisp, scheme, and assembly, and I feel that having an array of languages really helps me pick up any other language I would have to, because it's just a different syntax.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember my first year of college , I heard a lot of the students talking about how useless the first class was because we were being taught COMPONENT PASCAL !
Obviously , this does n't appeal to the job market very much , which is what they were upset about , but it was a GREAT first language .
It is so simple and easy to read that the professor simply used it to teach basics like loops , recursion , pointers , and object oriented programming , aka the THEORY behind the algorithms .
I loved this approach , even though it had little bearing in the job market , because when we moved on to other languages , it was easy to abstract away that specific languages syntax and semantics , and really just get to the heart of the problem .
By the end of the major , students learned component pascal , c + + , java , lisp , scheme , and assembly , and I feel that having an array of languages really helps me pick up any other language I would have to , because it 's just a different syntax .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember my first year of college, I heard a lot of the students talking about how useless the first class was because we were being taught COMPONENT PASCAL!
Obviously, this doesn't appeal to the job market very much, which is what they were upset about, but it was a GREAT first language.
It is so simple and easy to read that the professor simply used it to teach basics like loops, recursion, pointers, and object oriented programming, aka the THEORY behind the algorithms.
I loved this approach, even though it had little bearing in the job market, because when we moved on to other languages, it was easy to abstract away that specific languages syntax and semantics, and really just get to the heart of the problem.
By the end of the major, students learned component pascal, c++, java, lisp, scheme, and assembly, and I feel that having an array of languages really helps me pick up any other language I would have to, because it's just a different syntax.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671813</id>
	<title>Learn as many languages as you can in College</title>
	<author>Sarusa</author>
	<datestamp>1247411340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are so many comments in here this will probably get buried, but just in case: I'm a software engineer of 20 years. If you want to be an engineer, and not a programmer, the larger your toolbox the better. There is a difference - programmers churn stuff out in a given language, engineers solve problems given constraints.</p><p>You need the widest exposure to languages and concepts you can get in college. That's what college is for. I hope you end up having to write a compiler, even if you would never actually do such a thing normally. I hope you have to write comprehensive documentation for it, and maybe even do a Gantt chart, even though you hate all that sooooo much. There are things you need to do at least once.</p><p>You need C and assembly to teach you about the realities of the lower levels - people without this write hideously bad code because they have no idea what's actually going on. You need to understand pointers and freeing memory even if it's incredibly annoying and you never deal with it again - what it really means that Java/Python strings are invariant. People who've never done this have no chance at all of understanding what a cache line miss is either.</p><p>You need Oracle (or any SQL DB) because it's useful to have something to store your data in - you might find non-relational stores like key/value work better for your apps, but SQL is the default and as such a good comparison point.</p><p>You need bash because it's used a lot and you need to be punished with some of the worst syntax on earth (bad is good too, it's educational). See what happens when something is accreted rather than designed. You don't need csh, though, because that would be counterproductive.</p><p>Python (or Ruby) is an excellent thing to have experience in because it gives you the experience of being (relatively) utterly unconstrained by underlying worries - these languages exist to get things DONE. You can concentrate on the high level algorithms instead of worrying about whether methods are virtual. You can make huge changes to your architecture with relatively minimal code changes and see what happens.</p><p>Java is a good thing to know because it's the new COBOL and there is no better virtual machine - it's fast and the sandboxing is unparalleled outside of special high-security setups. The language is intended to be a straitjacket to contain incompetent consultants from doing too much damage on huge projects, but that's still something that's worth knowing how to do.</p><p>But if you knew just Python/Ruby/Java without knowing C you'd be cut off at the knees, or at least not suitable for real projects. What does it really mean that objects are just shared references (now that you know what pointers are)? What does it mean that strings (or other mappable keys) are invariant?</p><p>I'd actually like to see some C++ in there - as horrible as it is syntactically, it is the zenith of eking out maximum speed and minimal memory usage at the cost of vomitous syntax, and that's worth studying. Used right, C++ templates plus private inheritance let you do incredible things that fail at compile time rather than run time, which is huge for commercial deployment.</p><p>Still, you are rightly concerned about your lack of specialization here, to which all I can say is: pick your favorite language(s) and write lots of stuff that interests you or at least a major project. If you can't do that you shouldn't be in this field anyhow. This curriculum is far better than being stuck with one or two languages for your entire degree just because your teachers are cranky old farts who don't want to learn something new. I envy you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are so many comments in here this will probably get buried , but just in case : I 'm a software engineer of 20 years .
If you want to be an engineer , and not a programmer , the larger your toolbox the better .
There is a difference - programmers churn stuff out in a given language , engineers solve problems given constraints.You need the widest exposure to languages and concepts you can get in college .
That 's what college is for .
I hope you end up having to write a compiler , even if you would never actually do such a thing normally .
I hope you have to write comprehensive documentation for it , and maybe even do a Gantt chart , even though you hate all that sooooo much .
There are things you need to do at least once.You need C and assembly to teach you about the realities of the lower levels - people without this write hideously bad code because they have no idea what 's actually going on .
You need to understand pointers and freeing memory even if it 's incredibly annoying and you never deal with it again - what it really means that Java/Python strings are invariant .
People who 've never done this have no chance at all of understanding what a cache line miss is either.You need Oracle ( or any SQL DB ) because it 's useful to have something to store your data in - you might find non-relational stores like key/value work better for your apps , but SQL is the default and as such a good comparison point.You need bash because it 's used a lot and you need to be punished with some of the worst syntax on earth ( bad is good too , it 's educational ) .
See what happens when something is accreted rather than designed .
You do n't need csh , though , because that would be counterproductive.Python ( or Ruby ) is an excellent thing to have experience in because it gives you the experience of being ( relatively ) utterly unconstrained by underlying worries - these languages exist to get things DONE .
You can concentrate on the high level algorithms instead of worrying about whether methods are virtual .
You can make huge changes to your architecture with relatively minimal code changes and see what happens.Java is a good thing to know because it 's the new COBOL and there is no better virtual machine - it 's fast and the sandboxing is unparalleled outside of special high-security setups .
The language is intended to be a straitjacket to contain incompetent consultants from doing too much damage on huge projects , but that 's still something that 's worth knowing how to do.But if you knew just Python/Ruby/Java without knowing C you 'd be cut off at the knees , or at least not suitable for real projects .
What does it really mean that objects are just shared references ( now that you know what pointers are ) ?
What does it mean that strings ( or other mappable keys ) are invariant ? I 'd actually like to see some C + + in there - as horrible as it is syntactically , it is the zenith of eking out maximum speed and minimal memory usage at the cost of vomitous syntax , and that 's worth studying .
Used right , C + + templates plus private inheritance let you do incredible things that fail at compile time rather than run time , which is huge for commercial deployment.Still , you are rightly concerned about your lack of specialization here , to which all I can say is : pick your favorite language ( s ) and write lots of stuff that interests you or at least a major project .
If you ca n't do that you should n't be in this field anyhow .
This curriculum is far better than being stuck with one or two languages for your entire degree just because your teachers are cranky old farts who do n't want to learn something new .
I envy you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are so many comments in here this will probably get buried, but just in case: I'm a software engineer of 20 years.
If you want to be an engineer, and not a programmer, the larger your toolbox the better.
There is a difference - programmers churn stuff out in a given language, engineers solve problems given constraints.You need the widest exposure to languages and concepts you can get in college.
That's what college is for.
I hope you end up having to write a compiler, even if you would never actually do such a thing normally.
I hope you have to write comprehensive documentation for it, and maybe even do a Gantt chart, even though you hate all that sooooo much.
There are things you need to do at least once.You need C and assembly to teach you about the realities of the lower levels - people without this write hideously bad code because they have no idea what's actually going on.
You need to understand pointers and freeing memory even if it's incredibly annoying and you never deal with it again - what it really means that Java/Python strings are invariant.
People who've never done this have no chance at all of understanding what a cache line miss is either.You need Oracle (or any SQL DB) because it's useful to have something to store your data in - you might find non-relational stores like key/value work better for your apps, but SQL is the default and as such a good comparison point.You need bash because it's used a lot and you need to be punished with some of the worst syntax on earth (bad is good too, it's educational).
See what happens when something is accreted rather than designed.
You don't need csh, though, because that would be counterproductive.Python (or Ruby) is an excellent thing to have experience in because it gives you the experience of being (relatively) utterly unconstrained by underlying worries - these languages exist to get things DONE.
You can concentrate on the high level algorithms instead of worrying about whether methods are virtual.
You can make huge changes to your architecture with relatively minimal code changes and see what happens.Java is a good thing to know because it's the new COBOL and there is no better virtual machine - it's fast and the sandboxing is unparalleled outside of special high-security setups.
The language is intended to be a straitjacket to contain incompetent consultants from doing too much damage on huge projects, but that's still something that's worth knowing how to do.But if you knew just Python/Ruby/Java without knowing C you'd be cut off at the knees, or at least not suitable for real projects.
What does it really mean that objects are just shared references (now that you know what pointers are)?
What does it mean that strings (or other mappable keys) are invariant?I'd actually like to see some C++ in there - as horrible as it is syntactically, it is the zenith of eking out maximum speed and minimal memory usage at the cost of vomitous syntax, and that's worth studying.
Used right, C++ templates plus private inheritance let you do incredible things that fail at compile time rather than run time, which is huge for commercial deployment.Still, you are rightly concerned about your lack of specialization here, to which all I can say is: pick your favorite language(s) and write lots of stuff that interests you or at least a major project.
If you can't do that you shouldn't be in this field anyhow.
This curriculum is far better than being stuck with one or two languages for your entire degree just because your teachers are cranky old farts who don't want to learn something new.
I envy you!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672595</id>
	<title>The kind of developers I hire</title>
	<author>OrangeTide</author>
	<datestamp>1247419980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mainly hire developers who are generalists, versatile, fungible and smart. If you can't show that on a resume or in an interview, it is highly unlikely enough engineers at my company will give you a thumbs up for a hiring manager to justify hiring you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mainly hire developers who are generalists , versatile , fungible and smart .
If you ca n't show that on a resume or in an interview , it is highly unlikely enough engineers at my company will give you a thumbs up for a hiring manager to justify hiring you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mainly hire developers who are generalists, versatile, fungible and smart.
If you can't show that on a resume or in an interview, it is highly unlikely enough engineers at my company will give you a thumbs up for a hiring manager to justify hiring you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669161</id>
	<title>call them on the phone</title>
	<author>sneakyimp</author>
	<datestamp>1247431020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Find one or two companies that does the work which interests you, call them up, and ask them what languages they use.  Chances are they'll need everything from PHP, Java, Actionscript, Javascript, SQL, or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET for the web site to C++, Objective C, J2ME, or something else for computers, mobile phones, and game consoles.  Seriously, just call them.  Make sure you make a distinction between the various positions they have.  A single company might have hundreds of programming positions, each of which specializes in some particular thing.  A friend of mine who interviewed at Microsoft in the 90's met someone whose entire job was practically dedicated to the print preview dialog box for MS Word.  Another friend of mine works for EA or some other game company here in LA.  A typical task for him is to prevent that flanging sound when two players fire the same weapon in rapid succession in a first-person shooter.  He tends to specialize in audio-related coding.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Find one or two companies that does the work which interests you , call them up , and ask them what languages they use .
Chances are they 'll need everything from PHP , Java , Actionscript , Javascript , SQL , or .NET for the web site to C + + , Objective C , J2ME , or something else for computers , mobile phones , and game consoles .
Seriously , just call them .
Make sure you make a distinction between the various positions they have .
A single company might have hundreds of programming positions , each of which specializes in some particular thing .
A friend of mine who interviewed at Microsoft in the 90 's met someone whose entire job was practically dedicated to the print preview dialog box for MS Word .
Another friend of mine works for EA or some other game company here in LA .
A typical task for him is to prevent that flanging sound when two players fire the same weapon in rapid succession in a first-person shooter .
He tends to specialize in audio-related coding .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Find one or two companies that does the work which interests you, call them up, and ask them what languages they use.
Chances are they'll need everything from PHP, Java, Actionscript, Javascript, SQL, or .NET for the web site to C++, Objective C, J2ME, or something else for computers, mobile phones, and game consoles.
Seriously, just call them.
Make sure you make a distinction between the various positions they have.
A single company might have hundreds of programming positions, each of which specializes in some particular thing.
A friend of mine who interviewed at Microsoft in the 90's met someone whose entire job was practically dedicated to the print preview dialog box for MS Word.
Another friend of mine works for EA or some other game company here in LA.
A typical task for him is to prevent that flanging sound when two players fire the same weapon in rapid succession in a first-person shooter.
He tends to specialize in audio-related coding.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672881</id>
	<title>The computer language does not matter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247424000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I was working on my CS degree I did not have a preference for one language. My methodology was simple. Analyze the problem and see what would work best. For a couple of projects I used Java. For another project I used Lisp. When I had to turn out a solution quickly and where having an OO solution would have been an overkill I used C.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I was working on my CS degree I did not have a preference for one language .
My methodology was simple .
Analyze the problem and see what would work best .
For a couple of projects I used Java .
For another project I used Lisp .
When I had to turn out a solution quickly and where having an OO solution would have been an overkill I used C .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I was working on my CS degree I did not have a preference for one language.
My methodology was simple.
Analyze the problem and see what would work best.
For a couple of projects I used Java.
For another project I used Lisp.
When I had to turn out a solution quickly and where having an OO solution would have been an overkill I used C.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675535</id>
	<title>exprience, not languages</title>
	<author>dscarrol</author>
	<datestamp>1247496840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>bah..   don't worry about what language you are learning.   learn how the machine itself works (memory, cpu, busses).  next, learn how to write a compiler for something like fortran.  next, learn how they wrote compilers for things like c, java.  Play with javacc, antlr or similar and create your own parser.

imho, if you can figure out how a compiler works, you will pick up any programming language you come across with minimal trouble..

learn the basics and the theory behind them and then you can learn the rest as you go.  if you are going to college to 'learn how to program in language X', i think that you may be missing the point..  The idea being that you should be able to teach yourself how to express an algorithm in some specific language..
Trying to pick one or two to be really good at sort of pigeonholes you..  I bet that, given the time and motivation, you could figure out how to use  to perform , provided you understand the task from an algorithmic pov..

it may sound silly..  but actual engineering courses may help you learn about the software engineering..  Try taking an EE or ME course, just to get an idea of how unlike engineering much of SE is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D

SE is all about measurements..   the real question, to me, is this:  what are you measuring and what exactly do your measurements mean?

in classical engineering, these questions are often 'black and white' - that is to say, there are usually answers..

in SE, these things are much less clear..


You can't learn to be a good SE by taking courses..  THe theory does help but you must, in the end, learn by doing.

I recommend joining some open source projects.  Get experience.

A BSc is nice.. A MSc is nicer (depending on the school, of course...)..  Actual experience working on projects will often trump the degrees<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D

What sort of software do you like working with?   I'm pretty sure that you can find some open source project that is looking for someone just like you to help it along.  Work with a team, see how it is done..

That being said, you may find that the open source development is not a whole lot like 'industry' development..   But experience is experience..  Go ye forth and get ye some!</htmltext>
<tokenext>bah.. do n't worry about what language you are learning .
learn how the machine itself works ( memory , cpu , busses ) .
next , learn how to write a compiler for something like fortran .
next , learn how they wrote compilers for things like c , java .
Play with javacc , antlr or similar and create your own parser .
imho , if you can figure out how a compiler works , you will pick up any programming language you come across with minimal trouble. . learn the basics and the theory behind them and then you can learn the rest as you go .
if you are going to college to 'learn how to program in language X ' , i think that you may be missing the point.. The idea being that you should be able to teach yourself how to express an algorithm in some specific language. . Trying to pick one or two to be really good at sort of pigeonholes you.. I bet that , given the time and motivation , you could figure out how to use to perform , provided you understand the task from an algorithmic pov. . it may sound silly.. but actual engineering courses may help you learn about the software engineering.. Try taking an EE or ME course , just to get an idea of how unlike engineering much of SE is : D SE is all about measurements.. the real question , to me , is this : what are you measuring and what exactly do your measurements mean ?
in classical engineering , these questions are often 'black and white ' - that is to say , there are usually answers. . in SE , these things are much less clear. . You ca n't learn to be a good SE by taking courses.. THe theory does help but you must , in the end , learn by doing .
I recommend joining some open source projects .
Get experience .
A BSc is nice.. A MSc is nicer ( depending on the school , of course... ) .. Actual experience working on projects will often trump the degrees : D What sort of software do you like working with ?
I 'm pretty sure that you can find some open source project that is looking for someone just like you to help it along .
Work with a team , see how it is done. . That being said , you may find that the open source development is not a whole lot like 'industry ' development.. But experience is experience.. Go ye forth and get ye some !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bah..   don't worry about what language you are learning.
learn how the machine itself works (memory, cpu, busses).
next, learn how to write a compiler for something like fortran.
next, learn how they wrote compilers for things like c, java.
Play with javacc, antlr or similar and create your own parser.
imho, if you can figure out how a compiler works, you will pick up any programming language you come across with minimal trouble..

learn the basics and the theory behind them and then you can learn the rest as you go.
if you are going to college to 'learn how to program in language X', i think that you may be missing the point..  The idea being that you should be able to teach yourself how to express an algorithm in some specific language..
Trying to pick one or two to be really good at sort of pigeonholes you..  I bet that, given the time and motivation, you could figure out how to use  to perform , provided you understand the task from an algorithmic pov..

it may sound silly..  but actual engineering courses may help you learn about the software engineering..  Try taking an EE or ME course, just to get an idea of how unlike engineering much of SE is :D

SE is all about measurements..   the real question, to me, is this:  what are you measuring and what exactly do your measurements mean?
in classical engineering, these questions are often 'black and white' - that is to say, there are usually answers..

in SE, these things are much less clear..


You can't learn to be a good SE by taking courses..  THe theory does help but you must, in the end, learn by doing.
I recommend joining some open source projects.
Get experience.
A BSc is nice.. A MSc is nicer (depending on the school, of course...)..  Actual experience working on projects will often trump the degrees :D

What sort of software do you like working with?
I'm pretty sure that you can find some open source project that is looking for someone just like you to help it along.
Work with a team, see how it is done..

That being said, you may find that the open source development is not a whole lot like 'industry' development..   But experience is experience..  Go ye forth and get ye some!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671587</id>
	<title>If you want a degree to be a code monkey</title>
	<author>nedlohs</author>
	<datestamp>1247409120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't go to a CS school. Go to a school that tries to churn out flavor of the month language programmers.</p><p>Surely that's obvious?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't go to a CS school .
Go to a school that tries to churn out flavor of the month language programmers.Surely that 's obvious ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't go to a CS school.
Go to a school that tries to churn out flavor of the month language programmers.Surely that's obvious?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675521</id>
	<title>Language doesn't matter</title>
	<author>Pedrito</author>
	<datestamp>1247496780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My university taught Pascal (granted, this was a while ago, but nobody used Pascal professionally). There were survey classes that covered other languages, but Pascal was the core language of the program. Other students, upon graduating and looking for jobs, would ask, "Why did they teach us this? Nobody is using it."<br> <br>

But the actual language makes no difference. I started off doing PL/I professionally. Then C, then C++, now C#. Technologies change. If you can't adapt right out of college, you're definitely not going to be able to make the transition every few years to whatever the new thing is, so you may as well find another career.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My university taught Pascal ( granted , this was a while ago , but nobody used Pascal professionally ) .
There were survey classes that covered other languages , but Pascal was the core language of the program .
Other students , upon graduating and looking for jobs , would ask , " Why did they teach us this ?
Nobody is using it .
" But the actual language makes no difference .
I started off doing PL/I professionally .
Then C , then C + + , now C # .
Technologies change .
If you ca n't adapt right out of college , you 're definitely not going to be able to make the transition every few years to whatever the new thing is , so you may as well find another career .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My university taught Pascal (granted, this was a while ago, but nobody used Pascal professionally).
There were survey classes that covered other languages, but Pascal was the core language of the program.
Other students, upon graduating and looking for jobs, would ask, "Why did they teach us this?
Nobody is using it.
" 

But the actual language makes no difference.
I started off doing PL/I professionally.
Then C, then C++, now C#.
Technologies change.
If you can't adapt right out of college, you're definitely not going to be able to make the transition every few years to whatever the new thing is, so you may as well find another career.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669209</id>
	<title>Re:Maybe you're the wrong place</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247431500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Absolutely, and I'd like to expand on that idea just a little. There is a great deal of confusion about "the computer field" right now, largely because it is just now really being differentiated within the business world. Essentially, there are three fields: IT; Programming; Computer Science.</p><p>IT is about how to use the software that exists. This includes pairing it with specifics types of hardware and other software. This is knowing the best way to use a plowshare out in the field.</p><p>Programming is about making the software. This includes the specific language being used, how to set up the environment the software will run in and making the code work. This is knowing how to heat and hammer the iron into the desired plowshare.</p><p>Computer Science is about designing the software. This is engineering, scaling from deciding the hardware to use to the language to use, to the data structures and optimizations, all before the software exists (or, when the problem is being addressed). This is knowing how to think about a plowshare and create the idea of the plowshare (or improvements) and then explaining it (drawings, diagrams, etc.).</p><p>Each of these is a discrete skill, although knowledge in one will help ability in another. As this differentiation of the field becomes clearer, more understood and considered, answering your question as to what languages/degree programs will become easier. It's a matter of what you want to do or what you need to hire someone to do.</p><p>More people understanding this will alleviate alot of pain in the software business and in university.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely , and I 'd like to expand on that idea just a little .
There is a great deal of confusion about " the computer field " right now , largely because it is just now really being differentiated within the business world .
Essentially , there are three fields : IT ; Programming ; Computer Science.IT is about how to use the software that exists .
This includes pairing it with specifics types of hardware and other software .
This is knowing the best way to use a plowshare out in the field.Programming is about making the software .
This includes the specific language being used , how to set up the environment the software will run in and making the code work .
This is knowing how to heat and hammer the iron into the desired plowshare.Computer Science is about designing the software .
This is engineering , scaling from deciding the hardware to use to the language to use , to the data structures and optimizations , all before the software exists ( or , when the problem is being addressed ) .
This is knowing how to think about a plowshare and create the idea of the plowshare ( or improvements ) and then explaining it ( drawings , diagrams , etc .
) .Each of these is a discrete skill , although knowledge in one will help ability in another .
As this differentiation of the field becomes clearer , more understood and considered , answering your question as to what languages/degree programs will become easier .
It 's a matter of what you want to do or what you need to hire someone to do.More people understanding this will alleviate alot of pain in the software business and in university .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely, and I'd like to expand on that idea just a little.
There is a great deal of confusion about "the computer field" right now, largely because it is just now really being differentiated within the business world.
Essentially, there are three fields: IT; Programming; Computer Science.IT is about how to use the software that exists.
This includes pairing it with specifics types of hardware and other software.
This is knowing the best way to use a plowshare out in the field.Programming is about making the software.
This includes the specific language being used, how to set up the environment the software will run in and making the code work.
This is knowing how to heat and hammer the iron into the desired plowshare.Computer Science is about designing the software.
This is engineering, scaling from deciding the hardware to use to the language to use, to the data structures and optimizations, all before the software exists (or, when the problem is being addressed).
This is knowing how to think about a plowshare and create the idea of the plowshare (or improvements) and then explaining it (drawings, diagrams, etc.
).Each of these is a discrete skill, although knowledge in one will help ability in another.
As this differentiation of the field becomes clearer, more understood and considered, answering your question as to what languages/degree programs will become easier.
It's a matter of what you want to do or what you need to hire someone to do.More people understanding this will alleviate alot of pain in the software business and in university.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28680897</id>
	<title>Lots of similar languages create a rut</title>
	<author>\_greg</author>
	<datestamp>1247515740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The languages mentioned in the article are all fairly similar procedural languages. Choosing such similar languages makes it difficult to convey the breadth of powerful programming practices and paradigms.  A good programming curriculum teaches all of the major programming paradigms, first using languages which emphasize those paradigms, then multi-paradigm languages, then making sure that the student can use any paradigm in any language.  Along with learning one or two procedural languages, one of which should be C, I would recommend Squeak, Clojure, Haskell, Mozart/Oz, Curry and Flora2.</p><p>\_Greg</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The languages mentioned in the article are all fairly similar procedural languages .
Choosing such similar languages makes it difficult to convey the breadth of powerful programming practices and paradigms .
A good programming curriculum teaches all of the major programming paradigms , first using languages which emphasize those paradigms , then multi-paradigm languages , then making sure that the student can use any paradigm in any language .
Along with learning one or two procedural languages , one of which should be C , I would recommend Squeak , Clojure , Haskell , Mozart/Oz , Curry and Flora2. \ _Greg</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The languages mentioned in the article are all fairly similar procedural languages.
Choosing such similar languages makes it difficult to convey the breadth of powerful programming practices and paradigms.
A good programming curriculum teaches all of the major programming paradigms, first using languages which emphasize those paradigms, then multi-paradigm languages, then making sure that the student can use any paradigm in any language.
Along with learning one or two procedural languages, one of which should be C, I would recommend Squeak, Clojure, Haskell, Mozart/Oz, Curry and Flora2.\_Greg</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674791</id>
	<title>Three languages</title>
	<author>deadkennedy</author>
	<datestamp>1247492160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This may not necessarily be the ideal approach, and, I don't think there actually is one when it comes to learning how to develop software.  First, learn C.  This will give you a fundamental understanding of low-level programming concepts while at the same time using a language that is still important in industry.  Second, learn C++.  C++ is a natural progression from C in order to introduce object-oriented concepts.  Lastly, learn Python.  This will give you a good understanding of higher-level languages.  If it turns out that Python is your lifetime language of choice, all is not lost with your C training.  Obviously, the concepts learned remain but Python and C are highly interoperable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This may not necessarily be the ideal approach , and , I do n't think there actually is one when it comes to learning how to develop software .
First , learn C. This will give you a fundamental understanding of low-level programming concepts while at the same time using a language that is still important in industry .
Second , learn C + + .
C + + is a natural progression from C in order to introduce object-oriented concepts .
Lastly , learn Python .
This will give you a good understanding of higher-level languages .
If it turns out that Python is your lifetime language of choice , all is not lost with your C training .
Obviously , the concepts learned remain but Python and C are highly interoperable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This may not necessarily be the ideal approach, and, I don't think there actually is one when it comes to learning how to develop software.
First, learn C.  This will give you a fundamental understanding of low-level programming concepts while at the same time using a language that is still important in industry.
Second, learn C++.
C++ is a natural progression from C in order to introduce object-oriented concepts.
Lastly, learn Python.
This will give you a good understanding of higher-level languages.
If it turns out that Python is your lifetime language of choice, all is not lost with your C training.
Obviously, the concepts learned remain but Python and C are highly interoperable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671573</id>
	<title>Re:3 Languages are a good start</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247409000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recommend Malayam, Gujariti and Hindi. They should vastly boost your chances of getting a job post-graduation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recommend Malayam , Gujariti and Hindi .
They should vastly boost your chances of getting a job post-graduation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recommend Malayam, Gujariti and Hindi.
They should vastly boost your chances of getting a job post-graduation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674489</id>
	<title>Your school is leading you in the right direction</title>
	<author>Sketch2</author>
	<datestamp>1247489700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I was working on obtaining my MSCS degree, I took a class in programming languages - specifically designed to teach us that different programming languages are good at solving different problems.  I learned more in that class than any other single class I took over the years.  Struggling to solve a problem that requires recursion with a language that does not allow recursion is a real eye opener.

Looking at the results from a problem solving session like that, with one set of code taking many, many lines, and a second set of code taking only a few lines has an impact on you that can last your entire career.


Stay the course.  You will be much better prepared to tackle problems in the "real world" if you have  training across several languages, and you know the types of problems that each is best suited to address.


Just my two cent's worth...


smp</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I was working on obtaining my MSCS degree , I took a class in programming languages - specifically designed to teach us that different programming languages are good at solving different problems .
I learned more in that class than any other single class I took over the years .
Struggling to solve a problem that requires recursion with a language that does not allow recursion is a real eye opener .
Looking at the results from a problem solving session like that , with one set of code taking many , many lines , and a second set of code taking only a few lines has an impact on you that can last your entire career .
Stay the course .
You will be much better prepared to tackle problems in the " real world " if you have training across several languages , and you know the types of problems that each is best suited to address .
Just my two cent 's worth.. . smp</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I was working on obtaining my MSCS degree, I took a class in programming languages - specifically designed to teach us that different programming languages are good at solving different problems.
I learned more in that class than any other single class I took over the years.
Struggling to solve a problem that requires recursion with a language that does not allow recursion is a real eye opener.
Looking at the results from a problem solving session like that, with one set of code taking many, many lines, and a second set of code taking only a few lines has an impact on you that can last your entire career.
Stay the course.
You will be much better prepared to tackle problems in the "real world" if you have  training across several languages, and you know the types of problems that each is best suited to address.
Just my two cent's worth...


smp</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28696173</id>
	<title>The language doesn't matter...</title>
	<author>hazydave</author>
	<datestamp>1247565420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>.. the one they're teaching today is probably the wrong one, anyway.</p><p>So, I double majored in EE and Computer Science, with a minor in Psychology. Had I not already learned assembly, BASIC, and FORTRAN on my own (not so easy back in the 70s), it would have been immediately clear that language is just a means to an end... we had assembly in an EE course, LISP in psychology, and primarily Pascal in CS courses (they did offer one using FORTRAN, which was apparently of interest to ChemE students).</p><p>My first CS course was of the "let's get them programming" nature, and used Pascal... most of the people who took that course did not go on in CS, this was for all engineering and science students. Today, they would probably use C/C++ or Java, either would be just dandy.</p><p>The second class (the late 70s/early 80s version of 15-211 at CMU, before they broke it up into two semester-long intro courses) did not initially teach any programming language.. you already had one, any other is a simple matter of a day's study... right. We learned finite state machines, lambda calculus, all the stuff you need to know... including all of the possible things one might put into an arbitrary programming language (well, most of them, I didn't learn about generators until I played around with the Icon language, years later... most people don't need that anyway).</p><p>And that's the right answer. Since I first logged onto my Dad's timeshare account at Bell Labs when I was 12, I have used well over 40 different languages... some for fun, some for real work, a few for both (C/C++, Pascal, VHDL, HTML, Java). If you can't start to program a new language in a day or two*, given a good PRM, you need to go back to the fundamentals. As for the initial choice, if you have it, pick one that's sufficiently sophisticated you can use it and learn good modern programming, not so complex it'll eat you up. Real C++ may be too much for some people, and it's not a fast language unless you have a huge library... and using STL, you're kind of changing the language (others disagree, of course). Java's fine, too... but hey, Gosling was at CMU back then, I used his version of Emacs for years, and will continue to bless all of his works. I liked Oberon, but it never caught on, at least in North America.</p><p>* You can learn the language itself, and apply it to your knowledge of the generic constructs, in a day or two. You will not become proficient in some weird-ass standard library associated with that language, if it exists, in those days. When writing in LISP, you always had a fairly big tome describing the vast collection of functions available in the language at the time... well beyond C/C++ and even Java's basic support routines today (well, given this was largely pre-graphics, so we didn't have an ancient alternative to Swing or whatever).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.. the one they 're teaching today is probably the wrong one , anyway.So , I double majored in EE and Computer Science , with a minor in Psychology .
Had I not already learned assembly , BASIC , and FORTRAN on my own ( not so easy back in the 70s ) , it would have been immediately clear that language is just a means to an end... we had assembly in an EE course , LISP in psychology , and primarily Pascal in CS courses ( they did offer one using FORTRAN , which was apparently of interest to ChemE students ) .My first CS course was of the " let 's get them programming " nature , and used Pascal... most of the people who took that course did not go on in CS , this was for all engineering and science students .
Today , they would probably use C/C + + or Java , either would be just dandy.The second class ( the late 70s/early 80s version of 15-211 at CMU , before they broke it up into two semester-long intro courses ) did not initially teach any programming language.. you already had one , any other is a simple matter of a day 's study... right. We learned finite state machines , lambda calculus , all the stuff you need to know... including all of the possible things one might put into an arbitrary programming language ( well , most of them , I did n't learn about generators until I played around with the Icon language , years later... most people do n't need that anyway ) .And that 's the right answer .
Since I first logged onto my Dad 's timeshare account at Bell Labs when I was 12 , I have used well over 40 different languages... some for fun , some for real work , a few for both ( C/C + + , Pascal , VHDL , HTML , Java ) .
If you ca n't start to program a new language in a day or two * , given a good PRM , you need to go back to the fundamentals .
As for the initial choice , if you have it , pick one that 's sufficiently sophisticated you can use it and learn good modern programming , not so complex it 'll eat you up .
Real C + + may be too much for some people , and it 's not a fast language unless you have a huge library... and using STL , you 're kind of changing the language ( others disagree , of course ) .
Java 's fine , too... but hey , Gosling was at CMU back then , I used his version of Emacs for years , and will continue to bless all of his works .
I liked Oberon , but it never caught on , at least in North America .
* You can learn the language itself , and apply it to your knowledge of the generic constructs , in a day or two .
You will not become proficient in some weird-ass standard library associated with that language , if it exists , in those days .
When writing in LISP , you always had a fairly big tome describing the vast collection of functions available in the language at the time... well beyond C/C + + and even Java 's basic support routines today ( well , given this was largely pre-graphics , so we did n't have an ancient alternative to Swing or whatever ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.. the one they're teaching today is probably the wrong one, anyway.So, I double majored in EE and Computer Science, with a minor in Psychology.
Had I not already learned assembly, BASIC, and FORTRAN on my own (not so easy back in the 70s), it would have been immediately clear that language is just a means to an end... we had assembly in an EE course, LISP in psychology, and primarily Pascal in CS courses (they did offer one using FORTRAN, which was apparently of interest to ChemE students).My first CS course was of the "let's get them programming" nature, and used Pascal... most of the people who took that course did not go on in CS, this was for all engineering and science students.
Today, they would probably use C/C++ or Java, either would be just dandy.The second class (the late 70s/early 80s version of 15-211 at CMU, before they broke it up into two semester-long intro courses) did not initially teach any programming language.. you already had one, any other is a simple matter of a day's study... right. We learned finite state machines, lambda calculus, all the stuff you need to know... including all of the possible things one might put into an arbitrary programming language (well, most of them, I didn't learn about generators until I played around with the Icon language, years later... most people don't need that anyway).And that's the right answer.
Since I first logged onto my Dad's timeshare account at Bell Labs when I was 12, I have used well over 40 different languages... some for fun, some for real work, a few for both (C/C++, Pascal, VHDL, HTML, Java).
If you can't start to program a new language in a day or two*, given a good PRM, you need to go back to the fundamentals.
As for the initial choice, if you have it, pick one that's sufficiently sophisticated you can use it and learn good modern programming, not so complex it'll eat you up.
Real C++ may be too much for some people, and it's not a fast language unless you have a huge library... and using STL, you're kind of changing the language (others disagree, of course).
Java's fine, too... but hey, Gosling was at CMU back then, I used his version of Emacs for years, and will continue to bless all of his works.
I liked Oberon, but it never caught on, at least in North America.
* You can learn the language itself, and apply it to your knowledge of the generic constructs, in a day or two.
You will not become proficient in some weird-ass standard library associated with that language, if it exists, in those days.
When writing in LISP, you always had a fairly big tome describing the vast collection of functions available in the language at the time... well beyond C/C++ and even Java's basic support routines today (well, given this was largely pre-graphics, so we didn't have an ancient alternative to Swing or whatever).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669101</id>
	<title>expertise required in a single language?</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1247430540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That could easily box you in and reduce your chances too. If you only are an expert in XYZ, company A may only use ABC and wont even talk to you. Even if you choose the most popular language today, it may or may not be when you are ready to look for a job. ( or get downsized and have to look after years in the field ).</p><p>However, if you are versed in several, it shows you have learning/comprehension potential and have a leg up on what company A uses and might just get the interview.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That could easily box you in and reduce your chances too .
If you only are an expert in XYZ , company A may only use ABC and wont even talk to you .
Even if you choose the most popular language today , it may or may not be when you are ready to look for a job .
( or get downsized and have to look after years in the field ) .However , if you are versed in several , it shows you have learning/comprehension potential and have a leg up on what company A uses and might just get the interview .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That could easily box you in and reduce your chances too.
If you only are an expert in XYZ, company A may only use ABC and wont even talk to you.
Even if you choose the most popular language today, it may or may not be when you are ready to look for a job.
( or get downsized and have to look after years in the field ).However, if you are versed in several, it shows you have learning/comprehension potential and have a leg up on what company A uses and might just get the interview.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669229</id>
	<title>Re:Go to a "trade school" for that. Not a universi</title>
	<author>CarpetShark</author>
	<datestamp>1247431680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Maybe a hypothetical one like MIX or MMIX, but not an actual language.</p></div></blockquote><p>Personally, I favour Springbrook Valley Woodelven.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe a hypothetical one like MIX or MMIX , but not an actual language.Personally , I favour Springbrook Valley Woodelven .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe a hypothetical one like MIX or MMIX, but not an actual language.Personally, I favour Springbrook Valley Woodelven.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670613</id>
	<title>Anything will do</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247399940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>.. with the exception of Leet - do not go anywhere near it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.. with the exception of Leet - do not go anywhere near it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.. with the exception of Leet - do not go anywhere near it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669319</id>
	<title>Re:Go to a "trade school" for that. Not a universi</title>
	<author>RichardJenkins</author>
	<datestamp>1247389380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes."</p><p>If it teaches software development methodologies, or specific languages then it's not a pure CS degree. It may well be more valuable for most people - but call a spade a spade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes .
" If it teaches software development methodologies , or specific languages then it 's not a pure CS degree .
It may well be more valuable for most people - but call a spade a spade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.
"If it teaches software development methodologies, or specific languages then it's not a pure CS degree.
It may well be more valuable for most people - but call a spade a spade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672317</id>
	<title>Then you need a College not a University</title>
	<author>Secret Rabbit</author>
	<datestamp>1247416440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, Universities are for concepts and continuing on to graduate level/research/etc.  They are not there to prepare you for industry.  Fortunately, what they do teach indirectly prepares the student for industry.  Namely, they teach you how to think.</p><p>Honestly, it takes no time at all to learn a language and anyone that I know that is actually *really* good at any one language can list at least 1/2 dozen to a dozen other languages that they know well to *really* well as well.  It's the nature of the beast.  The more languages you learn, the better you are.  Why?  Because, each language requires a different approach (slightly to significantly) to solving any problem.  The more you get of that the better you'll be at solving problems in the most efficient way possible.</p><p>It's this one language fits all nonsense that really frustrates people who have a clue.  I got questioned by a boss once because I wanted to do a project in PHP and not Perl.  He questioned my abilities in Perl and assumed that I just wanted to do it in PHP because I was good at that and sucked a Perl.  I informed him that I learned PHP to do the project and did that because the qualities of the language were superior in that instance.  Even then he still wasn't convinced (btw, he is a politician with zero programming knowledge) and it took a co-worker and my supervisor to convince him that PHP was the best language for that job.</p><p>What I'm getting at here is that if you only know one language, then you are really screwing yourself over.  Not only is it going to be more difficult to learn other languages, it makes you less employable and makes the job more difficult because you have less tools in your tool-belt to solve the problems that come across your desk.  For that matter, why aren't you doing things on your own?  I actually learned several other languages during school and afterwards *on my own*.  I also expanded my skill set in other ways as well.  Remember that the I in IT stands for INFORMATION.  If you limit yours, you might as well throw in the towel now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , Universities are for concepts and continuing on to graduate level/research/etc .
They are not there to prepare you for industry .
Fortunately , what they do teach indirectly prepares the student for industry .
Namely , they teach you how to think.Honestly , it takes no time at all to learn a language and anyone that I know that is actually * really * good at any one language can list at least 1/2 dozen to a dozen other languages that they know well to * really * well as well .
It 's the nature of the beast .
The more languages you learn , the better you are .
Why ? Because , each language requires a different approach ( slightly to significantly ) to solving any problem .
The more you get of that the better you 'll be at solving problems in the most efficient way possible.It 's this one language fits all nonsense that really frustrates people who have a clue .
I got questioned by a boss once because I wanted to do a project in PHP and not Perl .
He questioned my abilities in Perl and assumed that I just wanted to do it in PHP because I was good at that and sucked a Perl .
I informed him that I learned PHP to do the project and did that because the qualities of the language were superior in that instance .
Even then he still was n't convinced ( btw , he is a politician with zero programming knowledge ) and it took a co-worker and my supervisor to convince him that PHP was the best language for that job.What I 'm getting at here is that if you only know one language , then you are really screwing yourself over .
Not only is it going to be more difficult to learn other languages , it makes you less employable and makes the job more difficult because you have less tools in your tool-belt to solve the problems that come across your desk .
For that matter , why are n't you doing things on your own ?
I actually learned several other languages during school and afterwards * on my own * .
I also expanded my skill set in other ways as well .
Remember that the I in IT stands for INFORMATION .
If you limit yours , you might as well throw in the towel now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, Universities are for concepts and continuing on to graduate level/research/etc.
They are not there to prepare you for industry.
Fortunately, what they do teach indirectly prepares the student for industry.
Namely, they teach you how to think.Honestly, it takes no time at all to learn a language and anyone that I know that is actually *really* good at any one language can list at least 1/2 dozen to a dozen other languages that they know well to *really* well as well.
It's the nature of the beast.
The more languages you learn, the better you are.
Why?  Because, each language requires a different approach (slightly to significantly) to solving any problem.
The more you get of that the better you'll be at solving problems in the most efficient way possible.It's this one language fits all nonsense that really frustrates people who have a clue.
I got questioned by a boss once because I wanted to do a project in PHP and not Perl.
He questioned my abilities in Perl and assumed that I just wanted to do it in PHP because I was good at that and sucked a Perl.
I informed him that I learned PHP to do the project and did that because the qualities of the language were superior in that instance.
Even then he still wasn't convinced (btw, he is a politician with zero programming knowledge) and it took a co-worker and my supervisor to convince him that PHP was the best language for that job.What I'm getting at here is that if you only know one language, then you are really screwing yourself over.
Not only is it going to be more difficult to learn other languages, it makes you less employable and makes the job more difficult because you have less tools in your tool-belt to solve the problems that come across your desk.
For that matter, why aren't you doing things on your own?
I actually learned several other languages during school and afterwards *on my own*.
I also expanded my skill set in other ways as well.
Remember that the I in IT stands for INFORMATION.
If you limit yours, you might as well throw in the towel now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28682665</id>
	<title>Re:Hobby</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247479800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hear hear, but don't limit it to Business Programming. I've seen SQL used to maintain the state of an automated test lab that was used in product development. (Think of an automated assembly line inside Dell.) System state and history were all maintained and operated on in SQL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hear hear , but do n't limit it to Business Programming .
I 've seen SQL used to maintain the state of an automated test lab that was used in product development .
( Think of an automated assembly line inside Dell .
) System state and history were all maintained and operated on in SQL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hear hear, but don't limit it to Business Programming.
I've seen SQL used to maintain the state of an automated test lab that was used in product development.
(Think of an automated assembly line inside Dell.
) System state and history were all maintained and operated on in SQL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669557
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675267
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677859
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671133
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674881
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669233
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672767
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673453
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671133
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677471
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28683819
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672651
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669269
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669667
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674937
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671573
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669005
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670605
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671793
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28700525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669457
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671133
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676503
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668925
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669727
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670311
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675815
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669859
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669269
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671601
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672711
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669029
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669069
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669953
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670343
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670133
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669953
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671677
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671121
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28683083
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28680623
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28687029
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673903
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28678223
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670187
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668965
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674139
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28686519
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671133
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675179
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28687695
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671181
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668957
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671379
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28687219
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671801
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28680763
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672689
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669953
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670205
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671315
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674353
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669657
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668891
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28678187
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669653
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671893
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668925
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677767
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669953
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674129
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669953
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671783
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669153
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668925
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669091
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670321
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672165
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674029
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28682665
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672311
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670021
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669585
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669515
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671051
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671221
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669209
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669087
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670735
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669229
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28682127
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669203
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669635
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670859
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28708113
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669139
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670189
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28680581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668957
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669469
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669721
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673009
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669797
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672285
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669031
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669011
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672221
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676093
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668915
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669035
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28681919
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668957
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669439
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28678163
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28683701
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28678857
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_12_1744220_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668957
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670359
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669005
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669835
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669087
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673903
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28687029
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670735
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669419
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672909
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669105
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668957
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669469
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671629
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669345
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670901
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668891
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28678187
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676471
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668951
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669657
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670605
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670187
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669209
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676185
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669011
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672221
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28686519
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668915
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669035
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28708113
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670041
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670021
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669439
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28678163
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668881
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669511
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669213
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669603
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672767
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671121
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673453
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671133
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676503
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674881
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677471
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675179
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672651
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671789
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669585
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28683083
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670321
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671221
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672311
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669721
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28676093
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672711
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669029
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671007
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669153
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670749
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671315
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674353
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671181
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671379
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669247
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669163
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28678857
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671573
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669539
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670097
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675253
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669797
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28678223
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672285
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668909
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669269
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669667
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671601
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675815
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28683819
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669293
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669553
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669031
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673009
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669557
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677851
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669203
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669653
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28700525
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669635
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670859
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668925
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669319
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677767
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669727
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669091
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669457
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669069
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669229
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668965
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668861
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669021
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670909
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28682665
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672689
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28687695
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28681919
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28680623
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671793
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671801
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28680763
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28675267
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28677859
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28687219
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674139
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28683701
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669233
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669515
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671051
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669131
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670133
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674937
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669953
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670205
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670343
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671469
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671677
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671783
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674129
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28673483
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671893
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670189
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28671833
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28680581
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28682127
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28670311
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28674029
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28672165
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668975
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28668997
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669859
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_12_1744220.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_12_1744220.28669425
</commentlist>
</conversation>
