Received: from cs.bu.edu (kfoury@fiddle [128.197.10.114]) (authenticated bits=0) by cs.bu.edu (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id i8KI4odD006258; Mon, 20 Sep 2004 14:04:51 -0400 (EDT) Sender: kfoury Message-ID: <414F1BBF.14C3FFCD@cs.bu.edu> Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 14:04:47 -0400 From: "Assaf J. Kfoury" <kfoury@cs.bu.edu> Organization: Boston University X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.8 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en To: Yarom Gabay <yarom@cs.bu.edu>, cs520@cs.bu.edu Subject: Re: cs520 References: <001401c49f2a$6458f1d0$0200a8c0@YaromAtHome> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------E70C4FABB263BE261C0220F5" Content-Length: 3814 Status: X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 X-UIDL: 411f69ec00000a41
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
At the end of this week, when I will get back the
implementation part of Problem Set 1, I will know
how many different prog languages are used for
the implementation.
If students limit themselves to SML, OCaml, Scheme
and Java, there should be no problem for me. I will
start worrying if I get back implementations written
in languages such as Pascal, Ada, PL/1, Fortran and
other ancient languages.
Assaf
Yarom Gabay wrote:
> Hi Prof. Assaf,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
> "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
>
> Concerning the issue of implementation vs. conceptual work in CS520,
> then I think that implementation is important for deep
> understanding. So I would rather if the course has implementation
> work, on the other hand not such work that will consume all of our
> time. I think the best would be small assignment to give us the feel
> of few of the ideas. Furthermore, giving a degree of flexibility in
> choosing the language is an excellent idea, and I can only suggest
> making it simpler for you by defining a set of languages from which
> we can choose.
>
> Thank you and best regards,
>
> Yarom.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Nov 19 2004 - 17:00:43 EST