3 ms·
Why is this being posted? I suppose it's interesting from a historical perspective, for what is available. This is so far removed from modern CS Ed that it's an
by acbart 7y ago
Why is this being posted? I suppose it's interesting from a historical perspective, for what is available. This is so far removed from modern CS Ed that it's an interesting little time capsule, I guess.
- jimbokun 7y agoI think modern CS could benefit from more claymation videos.
- qntty 7y agoIn what way? I learned about all this stuff a few years ago in school. Yeah there's more stuff to learn about now but the basics never change.
- acbart 7y agoYes, the learning objectives are all still relevant and will outlast me. I meant that the materials themselves are old and do not represent what's really going on in CS Education, from my perspective.
- SE_Student 7y agobecause it is interesting, and because the knowledge in it while old is still relevant.
- urda 7y agoI upvoted it as it was interesting to me.
- linguae 7y agoPointers, linked lists, and trees are fundamental concepts. Even though many CS programs have moved away from C and C++ for their intro-level courses, there is still a need to teach how dynamically-allocated data structures are implemented in memory. Even if beginning CS students are not exposed to pointers in their first or second CS class, they will be exposed to pointers eventually in many CS programs, either when they take a course on basic computer organization and assembly, or when they take a course on systems programming. Also, Stanford's guides are very well written. I remember learning pointers from these guides when I was learning C nearly 15 years ago as a high school senior. I still have the copy of K&R that I bought back then; it is very worn out now.
- acbart 7y agoI mean, obviously. No one's going to seriously advocate removing systems programming from the core introductory sequence of undergraduate CS degrees. The learning objectives are still relevant, I meant the materials themselves are old.