Simply put: YES!
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| theBeez Oct 08, 2016 7:25 AM EDT |
In my early BASIC days I had to graph a Keynes formula. Problem: on a character terminal, the "y" axis rules. The solution was to change the linear equation, such that the "y" value returned the "x" value. The resulting formula looked pretty queer for economists, but was perfectly mathematically valid. But also a lot of times when evaluating several algorithms, you have to figure out whether one solution is better than the other, since you can't simply work out several versions - too time consuming. Eradicate math and you simply get worse programmers and worse programs. |
| dotmatrix Oct 08, 2016 9:06 AM EDT |
Math and programming are inseparable. If you can't pass the math courses, you will be lost in the world of programming fairly rapidly. If you don't even try to pass the math classes, then the world of programming is probably not for you. Each 'major' has its 'tester' course. For my EE degree, that course was Electromagnetic Fields. If you can't pass Fields, you can't be an EE. And many people fail Fields. But I still am working on being a professional whistler: https://youtu.be/EpZB3RVwOrA?t=13 |
| jdixon Oct 08, 2016 9:54 AM EDT |
> Each 'major' has its 'tester' course. For my EE degree, that course was Electromagnetic Fields. I Yeah. I believe it was simply called Electromagnetics for us. It was rather difficult. |
| penguinist Oct 08, 2016 10:23 AM EDT |
Electromagnetic Fields wasn't too hard provided that you had the math. There were only four equations to memorize. The rest could all be derived. |
| jdixon Oct 08, 2016 5:19 PM EDT |
> There were only four equations to memorize. Maxwell's equations. :) |
| mbaehrlxer Oct 16, 2016 7:56 AM EDT |
it's one thing to learn math alongside with programming, and quite another to require passing math credits before you are even allowed to enter any programming classes. the latter is a killer, it would have killed me at least, and stopped me from entering the field of software development. so i have to strongly disagree, anything beyond basic math (middle school level, not high school calculus) is not needed for a successful career as a programmer. i didn't even complete my computer science studies (and not because of math either), but that did not stop me. now after working in the industry for more than 15 years, it is not math that i am missing, but more advanced computer science topics like software architecture. so yeah, in hindsight, i should have finished my degree, but math, i am still not missing it. greetings, eMBee. |
| gus3 Oct 16, 2016 10:44 AM EDT |
The Church-Turing Hypothesis was not yet formulated, lambda-calculus wasn't yet a thing, but that didn't stop Lady Ada Lovelace from becoming the first computer programmer. Yes, she did have a lot of mathematical instruction, but she understood the abilities of the Analytical Engine's design, even better than Charles Babbage did. He knew how it (would have) worked; she recognized what it could do. |
| dotmatrix Oct 17, 2016 2:32 PM EDT |
@mbaehrlxer: >anything beyond basic math (middle school level, not high school calculus) is not needed for a successful career as a programmer. There's a large jump between middle school mathematics and Calculus. There are generally two years of Algebra, a year of Geometry, and a year of Trigonometry. All of these topics are necessary for in depth programming. My programming days started when I was in 1st grade. We had old donated TRS-80s and Commodore 64s with tape drives. I learned BASIC. However, there wasn't much more than: 10 print "hello." 20 goto 10 The OP article mentions a college level programming course. The pre-requisites for that college level programming course seem appropriate at some 100 level slightly beyond basic Algebra. If one wishes to simply 'have a successful career in programming' perhaps in-depth mathematics courses are not necessary. However, if one wishes to have 'a really great career in programming' than one should be prepared to study mathematics in some depth. On the other hand, there are certain people who 'just get it' and can see how to program well without needing to understand the mathematics involved. Those certain individuals are the exception and not the rule. For most people, programming well is not something that just comes naturally. And by programming well, I mean creating effective and efficient [execution speed] code - not just effective. I imagine it would be very difficult to explain the reasons why the quick sort is 'quick' or why reverse polish calculations in binary trees are fast if the student does not understand the mathematics. So, I suppose, the problem is "What is Programming?" ... are we talking about creatively and independently writing code that runs well and has few errors or are we talking about using code blocks that other programmers with more mathematical skill have put together. In any case, I agree with you... that a successful career in programming does not require all of the math pre-requisites... but such a programmer will necessarily be at a disadvantage and will need to learn the math as a self-taught process or have code that suffers from certain 'non-expert' errors or efficiency problems. Last... I'm not a programmer by trade. My programs are generally utilitarian, and do - in fact - suffer from many of the problems I point out. However, I'm a decent engineer... but would benefit greatly from a deeper mathematical well of understanding. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!