Slashdot Mirror
Coding Classes & Required Development Environments?
Sadistic Yoda asks: "I walk into my entry level C++ class and the TA informs us that the code must compile under CodeWarrior for Windows, which is included with the text (Problem Solving with C++: The Object of Programming, Second Edition, by Walter Savitch), to receive passing grades. Personally I would rather use vi and g++ on the department's Debian machines from the shell. Will I run into any problems or do I bite my tongue and make it through class using their program?" I find it disappointing that schools think that "teaching programming" involves locking their students into a specific environment. I know it makes it easy for the teachers and TAs when it comes to technical support, but what about those students who already have a handle on their own system, are willing to learn the language (and its pitfalls in all environments) who can't (or won't) run the required software for whatever reason? Is this limited form of teaching really teaching?
Does the school have Windows machines with Code Warrior on them that you can use to compile your assignments? If so, I don't understand what the big deal is. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the TA's not to want to bother fudging around with code to get it to compile on the platform they're using. If they don't provide the environment on machines at school, and expect you to go out and purchase your own box which runs Windows, then maybe I'd complain. (Although apparently many schools in the US expect students to purchase their own computers and do everything at home; here, the labs on campus provide all the facilities you need for your courses. In this case you may have no choice, but see the texbook analogy below.) But otherwise, who cares?
Most CS courses here are the same way. If your code doesn't compile on the platform being used (often g++ on Unix), tough. Sometimes the software needed isn't available on Windows, so students who use Windows at home have no choice but to use the school's Unix facilities. And even if you're using Linux, your code is not guaranteed to compile on their system - differences between gcc versions, etc. may cause problems. If your code doesn't compile, tough - it fails the automated testing, and you lose a bunch of marks. Presumably if there's a problem the TA's are nice enough to try and fix code that doesn't work, and/or assign some marks, but I don't see what's wrong with expecting students to test their code on the school's systems before submitting it.
This is no different than being forced to do assignment questions out of a $100 textbook, even if you really don't need the textbook to learn the course material. This happens ALL THE TIME. You most likely buy the textbook anyway, and use it, but you can also just find a copy in a library or borrow from a friend. Likewise, in this case, if you don't want to buy Windows, you can either find a public workstation (presumably your University has some), or find a friend who runs Windows and compile on their system. How hard is that?
Ok, I'm on a bit of a roll here now. I'll probably get moderated down for this, but I don't even understand why Slashdot would post this question. Actually, the question is a good one; he merely is asking a technical question. It's Cliff's attempt to turn it the discussion into something political with his commentary that's stupid. Oh, poor Linux user! The horror of having to use Windows for 2 minutes to verify that the code compiles and runs on it (assuming they're not using features or libraries specific to CodeWarrior, which for an entry-level C++ course I would assume they're not)! I know we're Linux zealots, but why can't some people in this community just accept the fact that NOT EVERYONE USES LINUX, and there are going to be occasions when you're FORCED TO USE WINDOWS (or Macs, or...) For god's sake, stop WHINING and being offended and deal with it!
"When all you have is a hammer, everything
else look like nails."
The axiom above is true for many real life situation, including programming.
If you are limited to only VB or G++ or vi or whatever, make the BEST of it.
After all, you are in the class to LEARN something, might as well do you best LEARNING THE PROPER WAY TO DO THINGS RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.
VB or vi or G++ or whatever are just tools. You do not have to be attached to ONE SPECIFIC TOOL. What is MOST important is the SKILL TO CREATE, and that skill should NEVER be limited to any specific tool. You can "graduate" from using M$ stuffs, but as long as you have that skill to create newer and better things, you can always migrate to OTHER KINDS of tools available.
Hope all of you can glean the skill to create despite the obstacles the power-that-be want to throw at you.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Of course, many students wrote their code in (insert favourite moronic Windows IDE here), and just copied the code directly across to the Solaris box, and submitted without even checking to make sure that the program compiled. Many times, the program failed to work, and the students were marked down regardless of their protests of "but it worked at home". How are we supposed to know whether it worked at home or not? In any case, a little bit of investigation usually showed that the program had a combination of bugs that gcc/glibc/Solaris trigged but DroolIDE's compiler environment didn't.
If you have an alternative policy that is even slightly practical for a class with 800-odd students, I'd sure like to hear it!
In any case, it's not going to hurt you to be exposed to a different programming environment. At worst, you'll know *why* Windows programming is as horrible as Slashdotters often regard it :)
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
Everything worked flawlessly until the final. I had a 98 average in the class, but the final exam was to take a program and modify it. Well wouldn't ya know it, the stoopid program wouldn't compile under gcc, cuz of a few function calls depended on a library that was different in gcc than it was on borland.
So being the procrastinator that i am, i found this out the night before the final was due, and by 8 the next morning i had the program compiling/running with gcc. It was due at 10. So I had to hand my port to gcc, but of course i got squat on the final, and my final grade ended up being a b. sucks huh??
the moral of the story is, yes there are valid reasons for a class to require a consistent work environment. This is a prime example, If i'd used the borland thing, i wouldn't have had that problem, but i'd be out 90 bucks and i'd have to have used windows. I'll take the B.
i was in almost the same exact class. the teacher explained that everyone should use Visual Studio 6, because that is what is provided by the school.
All i had to do was raise my hand and ask if i could use vi and g++ on my personal linux box and he was almost overcome with joy, i actually had previous knowledge.
After i asked, the teacher had to explain what vi, g++ and linux was to the class. Seems a lot more people are coming into computers for money and not the love of the game.
just ask if you can, usually they are flexible for students who actually have some original thinking in their skulls. Also, on the plus side, they will probably remember you and possibly favor you for taking a unique approach to the first problem of the class.
xavii aka bob
Its not about tech support. If that's all the problem was schools wouldn't care too much. The problem is really cross-platform/compiler compatibility. As sad as it may be...something written for g++ *might not* work on Code Warrior for Windows, or Visual C++. This is less of a problem with C compilers, but still an issue. Your TA needs to be able to compile whatever it is you wrote, and so they pick one platform they will use.
For example, at my school they recommend a particular compiler, and ask everyone to use it (under the Macintosh, since that's what dorm clusters have)...for lower level C/C++ classes. At higher levels they reccomend gcc/g++. But the issue is that you really should be running the same compiler that your TA/TF is, or the results will be somewhat unpredictable. You could probably get by, but its always a major risk. And if it doesn't work on their machine, you can't just say "well it worked on mine" because you were using an officially non-kosher compiler to test.
In contrast, Java classes (where most compilers are relatively conformant) encourage the use of whatever compiler you want. They say it might be wise to test on the "target" compiler (JDK 1.2/3 on Solaris), but that its not necessarily "required".
My advice is develop at home - just make DARN SURE you test it thorougly on the foreign compiler and fix all compiler errors before submitting. (and you probably will have some)
1) You need to learn how to LEARN TO USE new tools. If you think what you have is bad, I took a course that required all programs to be written using MFC and Visual C++. Now that was a nightmare (spend 80% of the time trying to find what you need in the docs, 10% actually writing code, and 10% debugging). What made the class even more fun it was my Operating Systems class where we did some basic networking, threading, and deadlock avoidance.
2) You will always have employers asking you to develop using 'Y' platform (X is an overused buzzword). Even though we all know that practically any development environment can be coerced into making any program, you have to do it the way they want it, or you will quickly be looking for another job.
I don't mean to be a pessimist, but for your own sake, avoid starting any type of confrontation. By the way did you ask the professor on the first day of class? In my classes we usually get about 3-4 question on this very topic the first day.