4 ms·

It's not only that, but doing something like writing your own assembler probably isn't going to be terribly relevant to someone creating a web app or making a g

It's not only that, but doing something like writing your own assembler probably isn't going to be terribly relevant to someone creating a web app or making a game in Unity - particularly so 5, 10, or 20 years later. Heck, I'm not even sure that working on an assembler is going to be terribly useful to most people who will be writing in assembly. Students who aren't interested in a particular requirement will complete it and then soon forget most of the things they learned. Heck, even students interested in it will probably forget most of it if they're not using it for a particular task. If they're not, you're probably better off with a quick survey course which gives them the basic understanding they need. From my experience, the biggest problem with "CS" education (which tends to be a catch all for most software related computer studies) is the lack of focus. Students get a little bit of experience making a toy in language A, then they get a little experience making a toy in language B, then they get a little dusting of algorithmic theory, etc. My suggestion would be to try to get them quickly up and running on projects they're interested, to the point where they feel self-sufficient. Then teach them what they need to make their project better. They're going to both retain a lot more and come out of it being able to do a lot more. Trying to make every CS student a jack of all trades ends up being a colossal waste of their time and money.

gravypod 10y ago
All software is related in some degree. You will find that people who come from a background of compilers will do well in developing certian portions of games. In a sense most games are a compiler. You feed it in source (images, dialog, models, textures, etc) and it spits out an interactivly compiled narrative. Websites are also compilers. They just operate on a higher level of abstraction then the simple toy compiler we would right. The information to someone new is invaluable so long as they learn it themselves and aren't forced through it.
- Chathamization 10y ago
  Even most people I know who have written compilers haven't written assemblers; neither have most people I know who have written (real, not toy) programs in assembly. The argument isn't that it would be useless, but rather that it's an extremely inefficient use of one's time and money if the goal is higher level development - or even, I'd argue, if one was aiming for a proficiency writing programs in assembly. Again, I'd argue that focusing on being proficient at the level someone is interested in is much, much more useful than focusing on making a lot of different toys at a bunch of different levels and in a bunch of different languages. You are going to learn something either way, but jumping around with a bunch of small projects all over the place probably means that you aren't going to retain much and you're not going to have any particular strength at the end. Conversely, if you focus you're going to retain a lot more, since you can incorporate a lot more of your previous knowledge as you get more knowledge - in fact, if you work on a real project instead of a toy, you're probably going to be seeking out a lot more knowledge on your own as issues come up. In the end you're going to be able to say your proficient in your chosen area, and you'll probably be in a good place to expand to other areas (and you'll have a good sense of where you should expand to).
  - gravypod 10y ago
    > extremely inefficient use of one's time and money if the goal is higher level development Have you ever written an assembler? Have you ever written a compiler? An Assembler is far simpler then a compiler and after building the Assembler a compiler is an extremely strait forward next step as you've already finished the first quarter of what you need to do in a compiler. You've tokenized (broken the problem into small bits) and you've generated some opcodes. That's the perfect starting place for any systems programming background and a systems programming background is the perfect place to start out at higher level languages.

gravypod 10y ago

All software is related in some degree. You will find that people who come from a background of compilers will do well in developing certian portions of games. In a sense most games are a compiler. You feed it in source (images, dialog, models, textures, etc) and it spits out an interactivly compiled narrative. Websites are also compilers. They just operate on a higher level of abstraction then the simple toy compiler we would right. The information to someone new is invaluable so long as they learn it themselves and aren't forced through it.

Chathamization 10y ago
Even most people I know who have written compilers haven't written assemblers; neither have most people I know who have written (real, not toy) programs in assembly. The argument isn't that it would be useless, but rather that it's an extremely inefficient use of one's time and money if the goal is higher level development - or even, I'd argue, if one was aiming for a proficiency writing programs in assembly. Again, I'd argue that focusing on being proficient at the level someone is interested in is much, much more useful than focusing on making a lot of different toys at a bunch of different levels and in a bunch of different languages. You are going to learn something either way, but jumping around with a bunch of small projects all over the place probably means that you aren't going to retain much and you're not going to have any particular strength at the end. Conversely, if you focus you're going to retain a lot more, since you can incorporate a lot more of your previous knowledge as you get more knowledge - in fact, if you work on a real project instead of a toy, you're probably going to be seeking out a lot more knowledge on your own as issues come up. In the end you're going to be able to say your proficient in your chosen area, and you'll probably be in a good place to expand to other areas (and you'll have a good sense of where you should expand to).
- gravypod 10y ago
  > extremely inefficient use of one's time and money if the goal is higher level development Have you ever written an assembler? Have you ever written a compiler? An Assembler is far simpler then a compiler and after building the Assembler a compiler is an extremely strait forward next step as you've already finished the first quarter of what you need to do in a compiler. You've tokenized (broken the problem into small bits) and you've generated some opcodes. That's the perfect starting place for any systems programming background and a systems programming background is the perfect place to start out at higher level languages.