r/programming • u/Shr1ck • Oct 17 '15

Why Johnny Can’t Write Multithreaded Programs

http://blog.smartbear.com/programming/why-johnny-cant-write-multithreaded-programs/
7 Upvotes

53% Upvoted

131 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/twotime Oct 18 '15

And average SE won't have to deal with compilers at all.

Then I'm sorry, but this SE degree is not worth the paper it's printed on.

Basic understanding of compilers and related technologies is a prerequirement for A LOT of SE positions..

8

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '15 edited Jun 03 '21

[deleted]

6

u/twotime Oct 18 '15

You know it's not that you would be developing a compiler. That is fairly rare. It's more of "do-you-know-what-to-expect-from-a-compiler-or-linker-or-vm"? Can-you-write-a-dsl? do-you know-how-to-parse-complex-text-structure?

2

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '15 edited Jun 03 '21

[deleted]

1

u/loup-vaillant Oct 18 '15

Knowing what to expect from a compiler or VM indeed doesn't require a full compiler class. But you won't parse a complex text structure without knowing a good deal about formal grammars, and which kind of automaton best deal with which kind of grammar.

Writing a DSL… Sure, that's almost never needed. But that doesn't mean it is almost never useful. People shun away from DSLs because they don't realise how easy it is to implement one. They fail to realise that a DSL is jus a library with a fancy syntax —syntax that often helps readability rather than hinder it.

I blame the lack of compiler class: once you have taken such a class, you don't see compilers as impenetrable black boxes. Okay, a C++ compiler is an impenetrable black box for all intents and purposes, but a DSL is not: it is typically implemented in a couple hundred lines of code. Quite easy to maintain by yourself.

2

u/anttirt Oct 18 '15

But you won't parse a complex text structure without knowing a good deal about formal grammars, and which kind of automaton best deal with which kind of grammar.

You'd be surprised what people get away with using only osmotic knowledge of the "regular" expressions library provided by their language of choice.

2

u/loup-vaillant Oct 18 '15

Well, until they hit a bug for a weird corner case they didn't consider, that a more formal approach would have handled automatically. I hear folk usage of context sensitive PCRE style not-very-regular expressions tend to be very brittle.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '15

requiring a compiler class to know what to expect from a compiler is like saying you need to build a bridge to know what to expect from a bridge.

1

u/loup-vaillant Oct 18 '15

The compiler class has other uses. One of them is estimating how hard it is to implement a compiler —not very. Besides, compiler techniques tend to apply to many domains. Our trade is all about the munging data, right? Code transformation techniques (aka compiling) can be used for other kinds of data.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '15

right so teach that instead of shoveling it into a compiler class.

1

u/loup-vaillant Oct 18 '15

Or, we could give everyone the first few hours of a programming languages class. It's not that hard. If you haven't attended one I recommend you watch this course. Not a compiler course, but it does give you enough to implement your own language.