What people "should" know

From: Alan Pearson <alan.pearson_at_cramer.com>
Date: Wed Oct 24 05:19:39 2001

> YEsterday, somebody here (sorry, I can't remember who -- Alan Pearson?)

yup, that was me :-)

> admit that I don't have a clue about whatever bit of Java he claims people
> should understand.

Hang on, I'm only moaning about CS graddies who have been taught Java
for a year at college :-) java.lang.Object is the base class of everything
in Java, if they don't know that after being taught it for a whole year then
they know nothing much about Java, IMHO. Probably don't know a great deal
about inheritance either. It only annoys me when I end up interviewing them
and their CV says "studied Java programming for 1 year, in-depth
understanding of language & APIs", when they plainly know jack (in a box).
Doesn't mean anyone else should know it, only people who claim to "know

> Nor could I make any obvious comments about #include<foo.cpp> .
> It doesn't look particularly bad to me.

As you say, you're not a programmer. I wouldn't expect you to make any
comments. But people who have been taught C++ would recognise that this
is not the "done thing". To quote Gordon The Big Engine (sorry, too many
kids videos!), "it isn't wrong, but we just don't do it" :-)

> Does the above make me clueless.

Not at all, if I had 1/10th your hardware knowledge I'd be a very happy
chappy :)

Received on Wed Oct 24 2001 - 05:19:39 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:34:20 BST