<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" >
	<channel>
		<title>Comments on: The Definition of Computer Science</title>
		<atom:link href="http://northhorizon.net/2009/the-definition-of-computer-science/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<link>http://northhorizon.net/2009/the-definition-of-computer-science/</link>
		<description></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2012 21:51:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
		<item>
			<title>By: Canada</title>
			<link>http://northhorizon.net/2009/the-definition-of-computer-science/comment-page-1/#comment-26</link>
			<dc:creator>Canada</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 06:45:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://northhorizon.net/?p=106#comment-26</guid>
			<description>The origins of the CS/SE issue are, at the collegate level, probably rooted in what administrators saw of the Electrical Engineering programs. In that system, the basic science is (at an undergraduate level) very set in stone, so the innovation/production comes purely from, aptly, actual engineering. Computer Science is different. What languages, hardware, platforms... etc. we use are changing. EE doesn&#039;t get a new release of transistors, amplifiers or solder every 18-24 months. CS does. The school created the CS program to mirror the EE program in terms of depth, and it does that very well. That, however, is far from what CS needs. Entry-level programmers really don&#039;t need to understand how an ALU works to program. You are very right in identifying the need for a new area of study between the current CS and SE, and specializing both of those. If one truly wants to be a Software Engineer, this should be that degree path, forcing multiple languages and ideas upon the student.</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The origins of the CS/SE issue are, at the collegate level, probably rooted in what administrators saw of the Electrical Engineering programs. In that system, the basic science is (at an undergraduate level) very set in stone, so the innovation/production comes purely from, aptly, actual engineering. </p><p>Computer Science is different. What languages, hardware, platforms&#8230; etc. we use are changing. EE doesn&#8217;t get a new release of transistors, amplifiers or solder every 18-24 months. CS does. The school created the CS program to mirror the EE program in terms of depth, and it does that very well. That, however, is far from what CS needs. Entry-level programmers really don&#8217;t need to understand how an ALU works to program. You are very right in identifying the need for a new area of study between the current CS and SE, and specializing both of those. If one truly wants to be a Software Engineer, this should be that degree path, forcing multiple languages and ideas upon the student.</p>]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
