4 ms·

> I disagree. I think many of the problems in software development as practiced today originate from thinking that the theory is all that is necessary. This is

> I disagree. I think many of the problems in software development as practiced today originate from thinking that the theory is all that is necessary. This is such horseshit. Computer Science gives you the intuition needed to guide you to making more correct decisions you make in building your software rather than wrong. When you have these practitioners hitting the scene all of a sudden who just simply learn xyz latest framework/tool/fad and then are faced with a new and interesting complex challenge (for example, computers all of a sudden now have multiple cores! surprise!), they do not have the background to adapt and spend much time cutting their teeth, creating many bugs in their wake. If you think that having the theory makes you write worse software, I feel bad for you because your computer science education must have been shit and you probably wasted your money. In that sense I understand the bitterness that a lot of people have.

Bbowen100 9y ago
Common dude, tell us how you really feel. I don't disagree with you but I think your response could be less aggressive.
sidlls 9y ago
I write "engineering is more than theory" and you conclude "he means theory is useless." Here's my view, as a person who has formal education in engineering, physics, and mathematics: there are an awful lot of CS grads looking for nails to apply their textbook theory hammers to without understanding that simply knowing theory is not enough. I think you need to reconsider why the bitterness exists.
- yorwba 9y ago
  They: you will work 99% of the time on other things [...] but it can get really really nasty without the foundation. You: I disagree. Do you see how someone could make the mistake of thinking you meant "theory is useless"? FWIW, I agree with you both.
  - sidlls 9y ago
    I wasn't clear: I was referring specifically to the analogy drawn between engineering/physics and this industry. The analogy is an ideal that I don't think reflects the practice. In practice this industry focuses on theory, and sometimes quite intricate theory, as the absolute most important knowledge to have almost to the exclusion of other things. The bitter and vitriolic comment I responded to is a reflection of this.

Bbowen100 9y ago

Common dude, tell us how you really feel. I don't disagree with you but I think your response could be less aggressive.

sidlls 9y ago

I write "engineering is more than theory" and you conclude "he means theory is useless." Here's my view, as a person who has formal education in engineering, physics, and mathematics: there are an awful lot of CS grads looking for nails to apply their textbook theory hammers to without understanding that simply knowing theory is not enough. I think you need to reconsider why the bitterness exists.

yorwba 9y ago
They: you will work 99% of the time on other things [...] but it can get really really nasty without the foundation. You: I disagree. Do you see how someone could make the mistake of thinking you meant "theory is useless"? FWIW, I agree with you both.
- sidlls 9y ago
  I wasn't clear: I was referring specifically to the analogy drawn between engineering/physics and this industry. The analogy is an ideal that I don't think reflects the practice. In practice this industry focuses on theory, and sometimes quite intricate theory, as the absolute most important knowledge to have almost to the exclusion of other things. The bitter and vitriolic comment I responded to is a reflection of this.