Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Sounds like bullshit to me ... (Score 1) 216

What it will create is a new group of people who THINK they are wonder-programmers who will go into other parts of life thinking they know how to program. I run across these people, many of them who are scientists in other fields who decide to program their own stuff. I should say I've run across their CODE, which is awful. It wastes my time looking for bugs in trivial routines. For example, an input routine that doesn't handle a comment line properly because it is lacking the colon field delimiter and it tries to copy the input string from position -1 to 0 into the output variable. The author used a "friendly" fortran that spent a lot of time checking every parameter for every function. We are using the code for high-performance model runs on a highly parallel system, and that's when every piece of stupid code is uncovered. The one thing to learn from this is to NEVER assume that a bit of trivial code written by an esteemed professor was written correctly. THESE are the kinds of programmers Rahm will be producing.

I don't think the programmers Rahm will be producing are going to become professors. People who become professors and can write a rudimentary program might actually benefit from some training. What Rahm is going to do is...
(1) make people try to program who have as much inclination to it as I did for the papier mache part of Art class;
(2) make people try to program who are desperate to do well, but can't, and can't understand why;
(3) give everyone a nephew who "knows code" and spawns a thousand instantly legacy systems rife with bugs that frustrate every professional forced to use, fix, or maintain the system.
(4) Bonus: You'll have to apprentice that nephew so that he can "get some work experience" by hanging out on Facebook while eating into your IT budget.

You've been Berkeley'ed!