Real Computer Scientists Don’t…

Real computer scientists don’t write code. They occasionally
tinker with ‘programming systems,’ but those are so high level they
hardly count (and rarely count accurately; precision is for applications.)

Real computer scientists don’t comment their code. The
identifiers are so long they can’t afford the disk space.

Real computer scientists don’t comment their code. If it was
hard to write, it should be hard to read.

Real computer scientists don’t write the user interfaces,
they merely argue over what they should look like.

Real computer scientists don’t eat quiche. They shun Schezuan
food since the hackers discovered it. Many real computer scientists consider
eating an implementation detail. (Others break down and eat with the
hackers, but only if they can have ice cream for desert.) If it doesn’t have a
programming environment complete with interactive debugger, structure editor and
extensive crossmodule type checking, real computer scientists won’t be seen tinkering
with it. They may have to use it to balance their checkbooks, as their own systems

Real computer scientists don’t program in assembler. They
don’t write in anything less portable than a number two pencil.

Real computer scientists don’t debug programs, they
dynamically modify them. This is safer, since no one has invented a way to do anything
dynamic to FORTRAN, COBOL or BASIC. Real computer scientists like C’s structured
constructs, but they are suspicious of it because it’s compiled. (Only Batch
freaks and efficiency weirdos bother with compilers, they’re soooo un-dynamic.)

Real computer scientists play Go. They have nothing against
the concept of mountain climbing, but the actual climbing is an
implementation detail best left to programmers.

Real computer scientists admire ADA for its overwhelming
aesthetic value, but they find it difficult to actually program in, as it is much too
large to implement. Most Computer scientists don’t notice this because they are still
arguing over what else to add to ADA.

Real computer scientists work from 5 pm to 9 am because
that’s the only time they can get the 128 megabytes of main memory they need to edit
specs. (Real work starts around 2 am when enough MIPS are free for their
dynamic systems.)

Real computer scientists find it hard to share 3081s when
they are doing ‘REAL’ work.

Real computer scientists only write specs for languages that
might run on future hardware. Nobody trusts them to write specs for anything homo
sapiens will ever be able to fit on a single planet.

Real computer scientists like planning their own environments
to use bit mapped graphics. Bit mapped graphics are great because no one can
afford them, so their systems can be experimental.

Real computer scientists regret the existence of PL/I,
PASCAL, and LISP. ADA is getting there, but it still allows people to make mistakes.

Real computer scientists love the concept of users. Users are
always real impressed by the stuff computer scientists are talking about; it sure
sounds better than the stuff they are being forced to use now.

Real computer scientists despise the idea of actual hardware.
Hardware has limitations, software doesn’t. It’s a real shame that Turing
machines are so poor at I/O.

Real computer scientists love conventions. No one is expected
to lug a 3081 attached to a bit map screen to a convention, so no one will
ever know how slow their systems run.



Introduce tus datos o haz clic en un icono para iniciar sesión:

Logo de

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Imagen de Twitter

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Twitter. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Foto de Facebook

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Facebook. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Google+ photo

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Google+. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Conectando a %s

A %d blogueros les gusta esto: