Re: OT: The Geek defense
- From: tim <TimJ@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:04:39 -0000
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:45:06 -0600, Judson McClendon wrote:
Pete, I think you're missing the point. I agree that what they're teaching
now is sufficient for most applications programming. But for the foreseeable
future, we will still need skilled programmers to build the tools. You aren't
going to build .NET, for example, using .NET or other drag and drop tools.
If we aren't teaching those skills in our Computer Science curriculums,
where are future programmers going to learn them?
Yes. We need people to work on different levels of the
stack and that requires varied skills. Someone building static web pages
goes not need the same skills as someone doing numerical code using CUDA
for example:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/cuda_home.html
I do think this new world of parallel programming is going to make life
very interesting. Drop out rates from game programming courses are quite
high due to the level technical challenge. In CUDA (as also with graphics
programming for NVIDIA chips) there are six different types of memory.
There are trade-offs between the number of registers you use and the
number of parallel threads you can run, you have to be aware of cache
conflicts, etc.
Tim
.
- References:
- OT: The Geek defense
- From: Pete Dashwood
- Re: OT: The Geek defense
- From: tim
- Re: OT: The Geek defense
- From: Pete Dashwood
- Re: OT: The Geek defense
- From: tim
- Re: OT: The Geek defense
- From: Pete Dashwood
- Re: OT: The Geek defense
- From: Michael Mattias
- Re: OT: The Geek defense
- From: Judson McClendon
- Re: OT: The Geek defense
- From: Pete Dashwood
- Re: OT: The Geek defense
- From: Judson McClendon
- OT: The Geek defense
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: The Geek defense
- Next by Date: Re: The Geek defense
- Previous by thread: Re: OT: The Geek defense
- Next by thread: Re: OT: The Geek defense
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|