4 ms·

True, you can make it as difficult as you want. But generally, math, physics, and engineering programs are much harder.

cheez 9y ago
Depends what you mean by hard. I went into computer science and I got the highest grades in statistics at a university which is in the top 10 worldwide for statistics. In fact, I got perfect on the final where the average was a fail. I did "OK" in comp sci (deans list, but no special placement other than that.) Stats/calc/algorithms weren't hard, I needed practice. I did every question in every textbook and followed up with the prof when I didn't understand how something worked. Computer science actually pulls together all these different disciplines into one. By that metric, it might be the hardest. But really, nothing is easy or hard, it just takes practice.
- Bahamut 9y ago
  What you see with statistics/calculus is extremely superficial compared to the realm of higher mathematics. Exceling in that is a poor indicator of ability to succeed in any proof-based mathematics coursework. As someone who had significant exposure to the world of mathematics for a working professional (4 years in an excellent PhD program) and who codes for a living, I find that what I did in grad school was multiple levels harder than what I do now, or what I get exposed to in the inane CS-focused interviews of some companies. The abstraction level is seldom, if ever, matched.
  - cheez 9y ago
    Computer science is proof-based. Funny how both of us are dismissing stuff neither of us did in school :)
  - BearGoesChirp 9y ago
    >What you see with statistics/calculus is extremely superficial compared to the realm of higher mathematics. Exceling in that is a poor indicator of ability to succeed in any proof-based mathematics coursework. What about if you have to derive and prove the correctness of the formulas used instead of just memorizing formulas without background?
- kutkloon7 9y ago
  I don't think math majors consider statistics a math course. I should note that I did study a year in California. There, the computer science was much harder, and the math was much easier (scored straight A's in math courses literally without any effort, and nearly failed the operating systems course that I took).
kevan 9y ago
It wouldn't surprise me if there was higher variation in program difficulty for CS because the field is younger and doesn't have the level of standardization that traditional engineering fields have (ABET), but we need real data to have a meaningful conversation about it.
cbcoutinho 9y ago
This probably just reinforces his point - engineering undergrad is basically just applied math and physics, whereas the real meat of the major is usually reserved for whatever faculty you're in. Instead of having just 'Engineering', we have Civil, Electrical, Aerospace, etc. We should probably think of Computer Science in the same way. Instead of just vanilla CS, we could split a CS BA/BS into just as many specific concentrates: assembly, architectures, crypto, data related anything (management, safety, security, databases), etc.
- adrianratnapala 9y ago
  Trouble is, any good practicing programmer should know about all that and more (e.g. networking and UX). Of course people will have specialties, but they should have decent knowledge across the board. But they don't have to learn it all in school. The way for CS to cut itself down to a manageable size is to concentrate on the traditional "hard core". Compilers, operating systems, plus some newer (i.e. from-the-1970s) stuff like networks, distributed systems and concurrency. As always, people will cry that they never (ha!) do such stuff in their real jobs. But the more day-to-day stuff can be learned on the job. The stuff I listed is where university-style learning can offer a real advantage.
  - violinist 9y ago
    It's interesting to read someone else thinking that - I am about to graduate with my CS / Engineering degree, and I've tried to take classes which benefit from university instruction. The courses I've chosen and found most valuable have essentially been the ones you named: compilers (we wrote a compiler for a C subset), operating systems (we wrote a simple operating system with multiple processes), networks (implemented the TCP stack in userspace), and algorithms.
    - wonnage 9y ago
      If nothing else, these classes were great because they removed the mystery of what happens after you write your code. Many jobs boil down to moving strings around the network, and many programmers draw a line somewhere in the towers of abstraction we've built to do this, and never cross it. But you'll have the priceless benefit of confidence that if something goes wrong, it's code all the way down, that you can understand and debug.

Depends what you mean by hard. I went into computer science and I got the highest grades in statistics at a university which is in the top 10 worldwide for statistics. In fact, I got perfect on the final where the average was a fail. I did "OK" in comp sci (deans list, but no special placement other than that.) Stats/calc/algorithms weren't hard, I needed practice. I did every question in every textbook and followed up with the prof when I didn't understand how something worked. Computer science actually pulls together all these different disciplines into one. By that metric, it might be the hardest. But really, nothing is easy or hard, it just takes practice.

Bahamut 9y ago
What you see with statistics/calculus is extremely superficial compared to the realm of higher mathematics. Exceling in that is a poor indicator of ability to succeed in any proof-based mathematics coursework. As someone who had significant exposure to the world of mathematics for a working professional (4 years in an excellent PhD program) and who codes for a living, I find that what I did in grad school was multiple levels harder than what I do now, or what I get exposed to in the inane CS-focused interviews of some companies. The abstraction level is seldom, if ever, matched.
- cheez 9y ago
  Computer science is proof-based. Funny how both of us are dismissing stuff neither of us did in school :)
- BearGoesChirp 9y ago
  >What you see with statistics/calculus is extremely superficial compared to the realm of higher mathematics. Exceling in that is a poor indicator of ability to succeed in any proof-based mathematics coursework. What about if you have to derive and prove the correctness of the formulas used instead of just memorizing formulas without background?
kutkloon7 9y ago
I don't think math majors consider statistics a math course. I should note that I did study a year in California. There, the computer science was much harder, and the math was much easier (scored straight A's in math courses literally without any effort, and nearly failed the operating systems course that I took).

kevan 9y ago

It wouldn't surprise me if there was higher variation in program difficulty for CS because the field is younger and doesn't have the level of standardization that traditional engineering fields have (ABET), but we need real data to have a meaningful conversation about it.

cbcoutinho 9y ago

This probably just reinforces his point - engineering undergrad is basically just applied math and physics, whereas the real meat of the major is usually reserved for whatever faculty you're in. Instead of having just 'Engineering', we have Civil, Electrical, Aerospace, etc. We should probably think of Computer Science in the same way. Instead of just vanilla CS, we could split a CS BA/BS into just as many specific concentrates: assembly, architectures, crypto, data related anything (management, safety, security, databases), etc.

adrianratnapala 9y ago
Trouble is, any good practicing programmer should know about all that and more (e.g. networking and UX). Of course people will have specialties, but they should have decent knowledge across the board. But they don't have to learn it all in school. The way for CS to cut itself down to a manageable size is to concentrate on the traditional "hard core". Compilers, operating systems, plus some newer (i.e. from-the-1970s) stuff like networks, distributed systems and concurrency. As always, people will cry that they never (ha!) do such stuff in their real jobs. But the more day-to-day stuff can be learned on the job. The stuff I listed is where university-style learning can offer a real advantage.
- violinist 9y ago
  It's interesting to read someone else thinking that - I am about to graduate with my CS / Engineering degree, and I've tried to take classes which benefit from university instruction. The courses I've chosen and found most valuable have essentially been the ones you named: compilers (we wrote a compiler for a C subset), operating systems (we wrote a simple operating system with multiple processes), networks (implemented the TCP stack in userspace), and algorithms.
  - wonnage 9y ago
    If nothing else, these classes were great because they removed the mystery of what happens after you write your code. Many jobs boil down to moving strings around the network, and many programmers draw a line somewhere in the towers of abstraction we've built to do this, and never cross it. But you'll have the priceless benefit of confidence that if something goes wrong, it's code all the way down, that you can understand and debug.