Lets Make a Complaint about the poor scaling of SDD.. (1 Viewer)

[acmilan]

Programming encompasses more than simply writing code. I wouldnt consider someone an ace programmer if they are crap at the theory part of SDD.

 

[Fosweb]

Im using an example, idiot

Yeah righto. I just didnt like your example that assumed that an ace programmer would also fail the theory. I cant say that I ever did any serious hard work for SDD, and managed to pull out ok...

 

[Casmira]

no im just trying too imply that they will excel in only some areas of SDD, and not enough too score them a good mark

 

[Li0n]

This bob example is stupid, because bob is good at programming then he'll also be good at writing algorithms as they are similar.
Theory in sdd comes along the line of bullshitting and common sense, while algorithms require alittle bit of background help.

So if bob is a good programmer then bob should try learning some theory so he can get 99.

 

[sunny]

because bob is good at programming then he'll also be good at writing algorithms as they are similar.

How does being good at writing code make one good at writing good algorithms?

Bob may be able good at writing code - he might be able to hack anything out of thin air and still make it work - but that does not necessarily mean his code is efficient, concise, or of a good design at all.

 

[Slidey]

li0n didn't say being good at programming would make you good at writing GOOD algorithms. Simply that it'd make you good at writing algorithms.

If li0n meant efficient, he would have said: "being good at writing good code means you're good at writing good algorithms".

tehehe

 

[Casmira]

lets not forget those 10 mark questions that involve "asessing the solution of a program" and if all you know is VB6 then youd probably only know what code too use

 

[acmilan]

lets not forget those 10 mark questions that involve "asessing the solution of a program" and if all you know is VB6 then youd probably only know what code too use

????? I havnt seen any 10 marks questions in SDD about this

 

[...]

Casmira
you suck

end of story

ps: was i too harsh on you casmira baby?


edit: btw, happy new year

 

[Casmira]

????? I havnt seen any 10 marks questions in SDD about this

Extended response?

 

[acmilan]

The only real extended response was in 2003 when there was a 6 mark question in the options. Other then that all the 6/7 mark questions are usually to write an algorithm. There has yet to be a 10 mark extended response in SDD.

 

[hornetfig]

Im talking about an ace program on their own, ie. lets call him Bob

Bob will go into class with a head the size of a beachball, will do the practical tasks in 15minutes while everyone takes 45minutes and sit rest of lesson looking on the internet, and never studies

Bob will ace everyone in the programming assignment

Bob will fail theory exams and theory HSC ;D

Bob sounds like me - except for the last line, seeing as I was 2nd on the State order of merit for SDD in 2003. That Bob can program gives him at least a conceptual advantage in algorithm and system designs, that Bob is finished earlier gives him more time to study (not that I did) etc etc.

 

[hornetfig]

Bob may be able good at writing code - he might be able to hack anything out of thin air and still make it work - but that does not necessarily mean his code is efficient, concise, or of a good design at all.

I would disagree, they are related: in most cases those that are best at writing code, write the best code. In the SDD course, things are generally simple. The best advantage you can have is being an accomplished programmer. You grasp quickly what needs to be done and you can quickly bring that to fruition. The elegance of the solution is of secondary importance, but it does come, mainly from experience and confidence in any case given tight time requirements in SDD exams.

 

[raymes]

How does being good at writing code make one good at writing good algorithms?

Bob may be able good at writing code - he might be able to hack anything out of thin air and still make it work - but that does not necessarily mean his code is efficient, concise, or of a good design at all.

i think im missing the point of your argument here sunny. I agree with hornetfig. Someone who is good at writing code will be good at writing algorithms. The thought processes involved are similar; they know the tools (in terms of control structures, data structures, etc.) that will aid them in creating a solution. Their ability to code will inevitably reflect their ability to write algorthms.

 

[raymes]

seeing as I was 2nd on the State order of merit for SDD

me too...lets be best friends lol

 

[acmilan]

i think im missing the point of your argument here sunny. I agree with hornetfig. Someone who is good at writing code will be good at writing algorithms. The thought processes involved are similar; they know the tools (in terms of control structures, data structures, etc.) that will aid them in creating a solution. Their ability to code will inevitably reflect their ability to write algorthms.

Not necessarily. Algorithms and languages are taught separately in university. Sure some similarities exist but being good at one does not necessarily make you good at the other

 

[raymes]

Not necessarily. Algorithms and languages are taught separately in university. Sure some similarities exist but being good at one does not necessarily make you good at the other

i didnt say they were exactly the same but as i said, the thought processes behind writing each are the same. i dont care what theoretical differences there are between the two - take common sense and realise that being good at one will usually mean you are good at the other.

 

[acmilan]

i didnt say they were exactly the same but as i said, the thought processes behind writing each are the same. i dont care what theoretical differences there are between the two - take common sense and realise that being good at one will usually mean you are good at the other.

Well i have physical proof that its not always the case. When done professionally, the two serve different functions and are designed by different people. Two of the guys that were in my class when i did SDD were experts with coding in languages but despite that wrote their algorithms crap and couldnt understand any algorithms given in exams and hence whenever algorithms were asked to be designed they always wrote it in C because thats all they knew.

 

[sunny]

The thought processes involved are similar; they know the tools (in terms of control structures, data structures, etc.) that will aid them in creating a solution. Their ability to code will inevitably reflect their ability to write algorthms.

In a course as simple as SDD - then yes maybe if you can write code it means you can write good algorithms - but it is my opinion that is only because of the simplicity of SDD. As a matter of fact, for SDD I think you can not even be a code monkey and come up with brilliant algorithms.

Taking something more serious however, being able to write brilliant code does not necessarily mean they can also write a good algorithm. It is quite common for code monkeys to write the most obscure piece of code that solves a problem. I know, I am involved in an AI and Robotics research project at uni that has been running for the last 5/6 years, and you should see the code...

But lets ask several questions: Was the problem solved as elegantly as possible? Was the problem solved as efficiently as possible? Was the design of the solution elegant?

In a good algorithm, all the answers to the above questions should have been yes, not "its not an issue". A poorly designed and obscure algorithm written in an exam would probably not be looked at with much sympathy from a marker.

Lets take the better than average Year 12 SDD student (ie, knows a fair bit of VB6 before starting the SDD course), or the typical student that learns VB from class. They may be able to write good code and do their assignments, but nothing in the SDD course actually teaches good program design, algorithm design or efficiency. You ask a Year 12 SDD student to sort an array and a good deal of them would write an order n^2 (or worse) bubble sort, without having any regard for the quality or efficiency of the algorithm they are using.

Of course I'm not saying anybody is utterly wrong, there are always going to be exceptions - people that can do both, people that can do one or the other, or as it seems to be the common case in SDD, do neither rather well.

But the fact is, as far as SDD is concerned, Year 12 students would not have had any formal teachings about what algorithms are really meant to be, so I think at this particular stage it is hard to say a good coder is a good algorithm writer.

 

[Casmira]

i think too many computer whizzes take thisq subject too their head that they can destroy it, when they dont "oh i dont need too study" - then get slammed by exam, because the truth is you do, there is stuff in SDD i had no idea about, i never coded in vb before, i never used too map out my programs, i found doing flowcharts even though "annoying" helped my head alot more too map out my program