6 ms·

You can have a computer science degree and no nothing about Kestrels or Thrushes. Just because you stumbled upon them in a course or online it doesn't mean that

by kqueue 16y ago

You can have a computer science degree and no nothing about Kestrels or Thrushes. Just because you stumbled upon them in a course or online it doesn't mean that others should know about them. Trust me, I can pick a term from "Introduction to Algorithms" or Knuth's 3 volume books that you never heard about. For those who are interested in your plugin, chances are high that they know what K/T represents, but that's because they've worked with combinators before and that's why they are looking at your plugin.

raganwald 16y ago
You can have a computer science degree and no nothing about Kestrels or Thrushes. Just because you stumbled upon them in a course or online it doesn't mean that others should know about them. I know that, that's why I wrote this post. Although I don't think I "stumbled upon them in a course," Combinatorial Logic was a requirement at UofT's undergraduate program in the 80s. But I don't think every program required it then, and certainly not every program requires it now, so I don't think every or even many programmers know what they are. And I don't think others should know about them. I picked them as an example, perhaps the larger question is, "What subset of all the things someone might learn as part of an undergraduate CS degree should be considered standard?" If you don't teach SKI calculus, you teach something else, so it's not like people are graduating knowing less than I did, just different things. In recent years, it seems that the answer has been dominated by vocational concerns rather than theoretical concerns. So CS graduates are less likely to have heard of Kestrels or Parser Combinators than of Java Packages. I'm just pointing out that there is some value in having a standard body of knowledge such that jargon is immediately recognizable by new graduates. For those who are interested in your plugin, chances are high that they know what K/T represents, but that's because they've worked with combinators before and that's why they are looking at your plugin Well, obviously if I name if jQuery Combinators than K and T are fine names. But I suspect that if I named it "Ruby Shoes for jQuery" and named the methods "returning" and "into" I would have 10x the audience.

by kqueue 16y ago

You can have a computer science degree and no nothing about Kestrels or Thrushes. Just because you stumbled upon them in a course or online it doesn't mean that others should know about them. Trust me, I can pick a term from "Introduction to Algorithms" or Knuth's 3 volume books that you never heard about. For those who are interested in your plugin, chances are high that they know what K/T represents, but that's because they've worked with combinators before and that's why they are looking at your plugin.

raganwald 16y ago

You can have a computer science degree and no nothing about Kestrels or Thrushes. Just because you stumbled upon them in a course or online it doesn't mean that others should know about them. I know that, that's why I wrote this post. Although I don't think I "stumbled upon them in a course," Combinatorial Logic was a requirement at UofT's undergraduate program in the 80s. But I don't think every program required it then, and certainly not every program requires it now, so I don't think every or even many programmers know what they are. And I don't think others should know about them. I picked them as an example, perhaps the larger question is, "What subset of all the things someone might learn as part of an undergraduate CS degree should be considered standard?" If you don't teach SKI calculus, you teach something else, so it's not like people are graduating knowing less than I did, just different things. In recent years, it seems that the answer has been dominated by vocational concerns rather than theoretical concerns. So CS graduates are less likely to have heard of Kestrels or Parser Combinators than of Java Packages. I'm just pointing out that there is some value in having a standard body of knowledge such that jargon is immediately recognizable by new graduates. For those who are interested in your plugin, chances are high that they know what K/T represents, but that's because they've worked with combinators before and that's why they are looking at your plugin Well, obviously if I name if jQuery Combinators than K and T are fine names. But I suspect that if I named it "Ruby Shoes for jQuery" and named the methods "returning" and "into" I would have 10x the audience.