Ho-hum, it's that time of year again... the ill considered rant against Java as a teaching language! This time it comes from two notable professors (so they say) of New York University:

Computer Science Education: Where Are the Software Engineers of Tomorrow?

I have to say, I found this one particularly amusing. Mainly for one quote in the article:

Ada is the language of software engineering par excellence.

Now, I know everyone has their own favourite programming languages, and I know that this is largely an irrational choice based on what we're familiar with... but why oh why publish an article with a slant like that, when the two writers are the President and Vice-President of the company that sells Ada?

Author one: Robert B.K. Dewar, Ph.D., is president of AdaCore and a professor emeritus of computer science at New York University. He has been involved in the design and implementation of Ada since 1980 as a distinguished reviewer, a member of the Ada Rapporteur group, and the chief architect of Gnu Ada Translator.

Author two: Edmond Schonberg, Ph.D., is vice-president of AdaCore and a professor emeritus of computer science at New York University. He has been involved in the implementation of Ada since 1981. With Robert Dewar and other collaborators, he created the first validated implementation of Ada83, the first prototype compiler for Ada9X, and the first full implementation of Ada2005.

Seriously, why give any credence to such an obviously biased article? It beggars the imagination.

However, the editoral slant aside, the article is based on the same incorrect reasoning that continually crops up in this particular discussion - people confuse the tool with the technique. I personally think Java is an excellent teaching language, and while the criticisms in the article do occasionally have some relevance, they are critiques of a way of teaching Java, not with Java itself. For example:

'The irresistible beauty of programming consists in the reduction of complex formal processes to a very small set of primitive operations. Java, instead of exposing this beauty, encourages the programmer to approach problem-solving like a plumber in a hardware store: by rummaging through a multitude of drawers (i.e. packages) we will end up finding some gadget (i.e. class) that does roughly what we want.'


Well, let's put aside the 'Programming as The Purity Of The Mathematical' pseudo-intellectual nonsense at the start, and look at the core argument - Java encourages students to use pre-existing tools rather than write their own.

In industry, that's an unarguable benefit - reuse is one of the big benefits to an OO language. However, that's not the way to teach Java. Using Java does not preclude you from making students implement a binary search, or a linked list. The requirements of academia are not those of industry, and so you simply prohibit the use of existing solutions if you want to cover the topics. It's not hard - look through the Javanomicon and you'll see coverage of the key 'hidden' topics of Java, such as sorting, searching, and the mechanics of hashmaps.

Then, another quote from Bjarne Stroustrup: I have had a lot of complaints about that [the use of Java as a first programming language] from industry, specifically from AT&T, IBM, Intel, Bloomberg, NI, Microsoft, Lockheed-Martin, and more.

And then the situation's happy resolution:

It [Texas A&M] did [teach Java as the first language]. Then I started teaching C++ to the electrical engineers and when the EE students started to out-program the CS students, the CS department switched to C++.

Damning criticism indeed, from the man who designed and implemented C++. It's comical, really.

So yes, utter twaddle, from two ridiculously biased, unprincipled hacks. Sell your product, by all means - but don't dress up your adverts as research - that's shameful.

Drakkos.

Project Censored have just issued their newest Top 25 of Censored Stories, full reviews of each story are available at Project Censored.

The title 'censored' is misleading, because these stories have indeed been covered in most media outlets - in truth, the stories aren't censored, but 'seriously underreported'. That much is hard to deny considering some of the headlines:

1. Future of Internet Debate Ignored by Media
2. Halliburton Charged with Selling Nuclear Technologies to Iran
3. Oceans of the World in Extreme Danger
4. Hunger and Homelessness Increasing in the US
5. High-Tech Genocide in Congo
6. Federal Whistleblower Protection in Jeopardy
7. US Operatives Torture Detainees to Death in Afghanistan and Iraq
8. Pentagon Exempt from Freedom of Information Act
9. The World Bank Funds Israel-Palestine Wall
10. Expanded Air War in Iraq Kills More Civilians
11. Dangers of Genetically Modified Food Confirmed
12. Pentagon Plans to Build New Landmines
13. New Evidence Establishes Dangers of Roundup
14. Homeland Security Contracts KBR to Build Detention Centers in the US
15. Chemical Industry is EPA’s Primary Research Partner
16. Ecuador and Mexico Defy US on International Criminal Court
17. Iraq Invasion Promotes OPEC Agenda
18. Physicist Challenges Official 9-11 Story
19. Destruction of Rainforests Worst Ever
20. Bottled Water: A Global Environmental Problem
21. Gold Mining Threatens Ancient Andean Glaciers
22. Billions in Homeland Security Spending Undisclosed
23. US Oil Targets Kyoto in Europe
24. Cheney’s Halliburton Stock Rose Over 3000 Percent Last Year
25. US Military in Paraguay Threatens Region

This kind of thing is why it's important to read a wide variety of news sources - Slashdot covers the technical stuff in great detail, which means that number one on the list wouldn't pass you by. They also have a pretty strong line in digital rights, so eight, twenty-two and twenty-four are also highly likely category of stories to be covered. Plus, science in general - so number eighteen.

Truthout deals with politics, and most of the rest of the stories here will have been covered. Truthout is more a portal towards newspapers than a news source itself, but it draws that information from newspapers all across the spectrum. Story twenty was covered quite strongly in the Independant earlier this year for example, and although it passed most of the mainstream by, if you are an Independant reader (which I am), then you knew about this. Truthout archives stories across all of these papers in a very useful way.

I guess my point is this - don't rely on any one source for your news. You'll just be shocked when you find out what it is you're missing out on.

Drakkos.

Like to see big numbers by your name? Want to help Google put together meaningful search keys for image data? Then hop along to Google's Image Labeller and give this game a try.

It works like this - you are paired with a random partner on the service. During a 90 second window, you are presented with an image and asked to provide a description of it. Your partner is shown the same image. Only when the two of you suggest the same tag for the image do you get some points and then progress onto the next image. You can pass at any time, providing your partner also wants to pass.

It's strangely addictive, but alas the images are very small - perhaps a later iteration will fix that problem, but have a look anyway and see what you think.

There are a lot of legacy entries that will be transferred across from my old blog - but it's not especially easy (or rather, it's not especially easy for someone who is fundamentally lazy like myself - it's actually very easy indeed) to change the dates to reflect actual reality... so it may look as if I've been insanely productive. Alas, it is not to be so - I was merely active with Copy and Paste.

Bing!

Room 101 is the personal blog of the Monkeys at Keyboards team, and as such will be an eclectic mix of eclectica. More information to follow as time goes by.

Drakkos.