On Dec 8, 2003, at 7:19 AM, J Ingersoll wrote: [..]
[..]I'd like to know how many in the list - employed for their perl skills - learned perl on their own (practice, forums, books, et. al. ) and how many attended formal classes ...?
first off you really SHOULD NOT scare people
with phrases like " write microcode for " and
then refer to a four digit chipset. WAY BAD FORM.
{ and yes, doing the Motorola side of the assembler
on a RISC was much easier, none of that reverse
polish notation smack... }The best way to learn perl is to have someone on site who can mentor you, since that way you have the constraint of professional requirements, and can see where perl fits into the flow. IF you can not find a SithLord, then, well, join the rest of us the old fashion way, vote for comp.lang.perl - oh yeah, that's already happened... Buy the Big Book, make mistakes, enjoy...
The hardest part is getting the knack for telling which things are worth knowing, and which are merely passing fads, the cult du jure...
now back to the academic side of the chat.
On Dec 8, 2003, at 4:07 AM, Rob Dixon wrote:
Marcos Rebelo wrote:[..]
from this side the University is very important. Most of all, for learning how to think.
Exactly. And that's the basis of all the best English universities which are, sadly, being swamped by all of our 'polytechnics' being rebranded.
If you can't think, then no amount of 'Computer Science' lectures will help you to program.
I'm not sure that I like the phrase
"learning how to think"
as much as I would probably argue for
"develop the habit of formal analysis"
and from there hopefully move on into the rest of the process of being able to present that analysis in some polite way, eg:
"Well now that is Organic Fertilizer,..."
rather than merely blurting out say:
"smells like dung to moi..."
What would be useful of the undergrad liberal arts world would be a more active engagement in the fine art of 'learning to learn' - namely that it is not simply something that happens IN the hallowed halls of the Ivory Tower, but is a fundamental survival skill mix that separates "the eaters" from "the food".
It is a BAD SIGN when
On Dec 8, 2003, at 8:39 AM, Robert Brown wrote: [..]
[..]I spent my freshman year at Duke in 1969 and got kicked out because the second semister I lived in the computer center and never went to class.
One of the other things that one should be learning as an undergrad is a bit about 'time management' as well as the various social and cultural skills that make the university environment the recruiting grounds for various spying organizations...
Education is nice, but the economy is the governing factor. I still have that wife and daughter I told you about!
This, unfortunately, is NOT something that most universities will teach you up front. Having all of the brilliance in the world does NOT mean that it will make a job possible. Nor for that matter, that one can figure out a way to sustain a long term growing set of personal relationships.
There is also nested in Robert's presentation that more interesting idea - namely that one go back and attend university anyway, and this time to do it with an intention to graduate, and in a field that you find at least interesting and amusing. Nothing Screws Up the Kiddies like Grey Panthers arriving back 'from the fleet' with 'additional perspective' not included in the SillyBuy from the Prof....
Ultimately one needs to re-read Marcos' other line:
On Dec 7, 2003, at 10:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [..]
[..]Anyone can do hacker programming but for doing software engineering you need to know a little bit more.
The question remains whether that is material that a University can provide, or is that the sort of professionalism that comes from life amongst the professionals.
A part of the problem IS the very phrase "software engineering". Has it been an ambition, rather than an actual assertion, of a real relationship between 'software' and 'engineering'.
As folks start noticing that 'there is more than one way to do it' - in perl, out of perl, etc, etc, etc... The mythological 'software engineering' entity really comes under fire perchance more than merely 'hacker programming'.
Think for a moment folks, the lead time that a university will need to just get the course catelog out the door. In that same amount of time, the professional rags will of course wander their way through how many different hip new next wave trends in CodeMonger??? Anyone ever see that 4GL? Or are we really retreating into the new wave of IDE, that makes the CodeMonkey more productive???
So while I would so love to believe in such things as the Mythological Perkin-Month, there is that minor management problem that one can not merely assign nine womyn and get one baby in a 30 day period.
Ultimately the relationship between the academic world, the professional world will be a bit, uh, interesting.
If you can 'improve your position' by mere talent and talent alone - then focus on growing that talent. If on the other hand having been vetted by some Ivory Tower, well, then get that piece of paper, and never worry about the technical questions about learning diddly squat, the mission is to get the piece of paper, you can figure out how to be a coder later on when you actually have to have some talent...
ciao drieux
---
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://learn.perl.org/> <http://learn.perl.org/first-response>
