hristov is dismissing the point of the article rather than missing it. CS higher education is faced with deep challenges (not least of which is the continuing

hristov is dismissing the point of the article rather than missing it. CS higher education is faced with deep challenges (not least of which is the continuing argument of how much CS should be software-engineering oriented). Ignoring those challenges entirely though, we should not conflate plagiarism of programs with code re-use. Code re-use is an important part of the "real world." But not in the practice of programming for learning purposes. Exploratory programming and code hacking, as you point out, is a wonderful learning mechanism. I'm scared when the original article makes statements like "I no longer teach programming by teaching the features of the language and asking the students for original compositions in the language." And you should be too. I don't worry so much about cheating, but rather more about the end result in the marketplace. Why do organizations shy away from developing their own tools and software internally? High cost with a low likelihood of success? I think that poor software developers negatively influence the opportunity for software development. There are times when custom software development has significant advantages over the purchase of software solutions. While it is important to actually consider the benefits and costs of custom vs buy, I always feel a little bewildered explaining that we can create and support custom software in-house. I also cringe at in-house software dev shops that primarily are configuration experts and administrators for purchased solutions. Of course, that same reluctance to do in-house dev is probably a major opportunity for entrepreneurial hackers.