|How to justify teaching compilers firstname.lastname@example.org (Pg Nor Jaidi Pg Tuah) (2004-10-02)|
|Re: How to justify teaching compilers email@example.com (Mayan Moudgill) (2004-10-02)|
|Re: How to justify teaching compilers firstname.lastname@example.org (Thomas Claveirole) (2004-10-02)|
|Re: How to justify teaching compilers email@example.com (Max Hailperin) (2004-10-02)|
|Re: How to justify teaching compilers Juergen.Kahrs@vr-web.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen_Kahrs?=) (2004-10-04)|
|Re: How to justify teaching compilers firstname.lastname@example.org (Tomasz Kowaltowski) (2004-10-04)|
|Re: How to justify teaching compilers email@example.com (Gene Wirchenko) (2004-10-04)|
|[8 later articles]|
|From:||"Pg Nor Jaidi Pg Tuah" <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||2 Oct 2004 01:15:50 -0400|
|Posted-Date:||02 Oct 2004 01:15:50 EDT|
Dear compiler-loving academics,
With the fast expanding frontier of computer science, and the
(unreasonable) expectation that CS graduates be fully "productive"
from day 1 of their work, CS curriculum must include more "hot"
topics, squeezing out "old fashioned" stuff.
Thus I find my "compiler is fun" argument losing to "compiler
knowledge is not so useful anymore" argument, especially when more
than half of the students would likely find the subject terribly
difficult. If you are in this situation, and you have no strong
compiler research group to back you up (if you have a compiler
research group, you wouldn't be in this situation, would you?), how
would you justify keeping/introducing your beloved compiler course?
If you can compromise and reduce compiler to just a few hours of
lectures (embedded in, say, "systems programming"), what would you
[I don't think many CS students are likely to write a C compiler,
but most of them are going to write things that are scanners or parsers,
even if they don't call them that. -John]
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.