Comment by leonroy | Hacker News Reader

Comment by leonroy | Hacker News Reader

I've been a software dev for 10 years. When I started I saw the transition from Perl to PHP and a lot of snobbishness from the former towards the latter. Seeing the changing of the guard in web languages was pretty instructional and it's something I see again and again.

I think basic CompSci courses should really have a course or two on managing software projects and handling the problems of what framework do I use to build my new software app? Because fundamental language or framework decisions have both a technical and a business component and even as a front line programmer it helps to be aware of both.

Node.js is a great environment for getting a server side app going fast and it has very good tooling thanks to the rest of the JS community with additions like npm, gulp, bower, express etc. There's obvious benefit in having shareable libraries between client and server side and most importantly (to software companies) hiring coders who can work with it is far, far easier than say finding that rarest of unicorns - an experienced Haskell developer.

If (and it's a damn big if) you outgrow Node.js you're doing well. Then (and only then) look at the alternatives like Play Framework, Spring Boot, Vert.x or whatever else floats your boat.

Rants can be useful in giving a kick up the asses of the relevant community to go address certain bug bears. This rant though is so damn generic it reminds me of those Perl developers at college pouring cold water over the idea of using PHP because they felt threatened by it.

    I think basic CompSci courses should really have a
    course or two on managing software projects and handling
    the problems of what framework do I use to build my new
    software app

The problem (if it's a problem, depends on who's asking) is that undergrad CS courses mainly train you to be a CS graduate student (which in turn train you to be a CS academic), but most students choose to major in CS because they want to become professional programmers (aka Software Engineers).

I've done both bachelor and master level CS studies and job-preparation-wise would probably have gotten as much (or more) from a 1-1.5 years (2-3 semesters) vocational training than I did from 8 years of university.

Probably the most apparent perk my studies have gotten me career-wise was being invited to interviews at major tech companies like google and amazon.

> most students choose to major in CS because they want to become professional programmers (aka Software Engineers)

Then why not major in Software Engineering? Is that not an option in American universities?

Not sure about America but it's more of lack of understanding in Australia.

Also, in the university i am studying in. The university course for a Software Engineer is for 5 years since that is the minimum study time needed to be accredited as an engineer while the CS degree is 3 years.

The more messed up thing is that everything taught in CS major is taught the Software Engineering major but Software Engineering has more electives and has a few general engineering units.

One problem is that it does not have the standing of a pure subject like math, engineering or CS.

Its more vocational, isn't offered by top-tier universities (in the UK) and therefore has lower status e.g. its like taking Media Studies at an ex-poly vs. reading English at Oxford.

It was very much seen that way back in the day at Birmingham University. We wrote an x11 window manager with audio and graphics processor apps for our first term in 2nd year. I saw academia start to go down the pan at college with the introduction of "ICT". To me, this was nothing but subsidised Microsoft training.

this was nothing but subsidised Microsoft training.

"Subsidized Microsoft training" is what most people actually want and need to get the sort of job they aspire to. People with this "Subsidized Microsoft training" are also what many companies are looking to hire. So why is it such a bad thing to offer people this option?

It's not a problem, unless you go to higher education looking for CS and end up with that instead.

Because we need people to program computers not use word.

There is a problem here, but to be clear, the solution is not to convert CS into vocational training. The problem with the way software engineering was introduced into US universities is that it was usually dumbed-down to broaden its appeal. I do not know if it is still like that.

It's not common. Usually you can choose between Computer Science or Electrical Engineering, if you want to do things with computers. The problem is, Comp Sci tends towards an inordinate amount of proofs on blackboards and theoretical horse-hockey, that you don't get to actually do in code, while EE tends towards playing with soldering irons and wiring breadboards, with a little embedded low-level programming.

Or my favorite - Business Administration with Concentration in Management Information Systems. This was my route and it laid a great foundation of how business works (you know, that part of a company that PAYS for IT... as well as business-focused IT (which does lag behind new uses of tech but does cover being ready for fundamental shifts/disruptions - which has been around in the business world since the beginning).

Don't know about the US but in Israel anything to do with programming is in such high demand and so overbooked (therefor requiring competitive grades to get in) that you get what you can.

I got into my bachelors in 2002, at the nadir of the dot-com crash (when demand for CS education was at its lowest) & my grades in high-school were just good enough to get into the Math & CS combined program (both CS or SE had higher requirements).

The only other option would have been to go to a private college rather than a state university, which would have had (at least) double the tuition and (at most) half the prestige/employability-potential of a university degree.

Interesting. I'm from Germany and studied "Computer Science and Media" and it was rather overbooked, like Media stuff often is here.

But the regular computer science or software engineering degrees (like most technical degrees) aren't overbooked ever.

They let in everyone and throw 60% - 70% out after the first year.

Unlike Germany, in Israel how desirable a study is is directly correlated with how much money one can make working in it...So media/art stuff is very low on the totem pole.

Hehe.

I have the feeling most German (Millenials?) just study what they do in their free time.

Yes, there are the academic families, that tell their kids to become lawyer or medical doctor or something like that.

But most tell me I was just lucky that I liked doing computer stuff, so I could study computer science and make "mad bucks" while they liked to draw or read and had to study something like languages or fine arts.

I have actually been living in Germany for the past 3 years, and spent 8 years in Austria before that :)

I find the non-materialistic (or at least less materialistic) mentality here preferable. But to be honest I think the only reason is that life in the German speaking countries is much easier - you can earn minimum wage or close to it and still live a decent life.

In Israel I had to earn twice as much for half the quality of life (slight exaggeration but only slight).

I like this mentality too.

But Bafög (the german student aid) can accumulate to more than 10k€ of dept (you have to pay back half of it) and some of my friends even took credits for their (non-consecutive) master degrees or because they didn't finish their bachelors in regular time. Now they are stuck with 10k - 40k of dept and no way to pay this back in with the money they make.

Yes, it is an option (at least in America). Many colleges' business departments do offer a "information technology" degree, which typically combines some high-level programming skills with some business school classes (eg accounting, economics, management, marketing, etc.).

This is probably the best undergrad option for anyone who wants to be a "professional programmer" over here, if you are more concerned about the writing web apps side and not the optimize-that-algorithm nuts-and-bolts type of side.

I think this actually varies from school to school. My undergraduate university, where the CS program was part of the engineering school, focused on software engineering. My graduate university where the CS program was a part of the college of arts and sciences focused a lot more on theory. But my view here may be skewed, because I only remember one professor who taught most of our theory courses -- I took most of his classes.

From roughly the same number of years in university, (8ish) I can say there were some clear professional benefits from me having done a masters' program. From my advanced software engineering course I was able to talk to my teammates about Gang of Four and better ways go about problems than if-else loops. From my theory courses I was able to identify problems they were seeing, tell them which algorithms would probably be worth looking into etc...

That is all stuff one can learn outside of university, but I learned it while I was there. I get giddy whenever I can try something new and all the writing I did (I wrote a few academic papers) made me really comfortable with writing technical design specs and documentation. When I was in academia I had to document everything anyways so its become second nature to me.

I think 2-3 more years of working would have certainly looked better on a resume, but I think my skill set has added to my team as a whole and I'm glad I did it.

Well I would argue that universities are here to create acidemics, not create job candidates. That vocational work is exactly what you need to be a software engineer. I think the issue is more people don't understand what university level CS is, or that it's NOT a "get a job" pass.

Well companies demand it. You can get a job on work experience alone, but if you're just starting out good luck applying to Google/MS/Facebook/Amazon/etc with only vocational training.

I don't disagree with most of what you say but I can't shake the feeling that for the most common types of web project - nothing touches the productivity possible with frameworks such as Rails or Django.

(I don't know enough about mature PHP MVC frameworks to comment on whether Laravel et al should also be in that list)

Is there anything for node that offers that wide range of functionality and a mature ecosystem for content-driven sites?

> If (and it's a damn big if) you outgrow Node.js you're doing well. Then (and only then) look at the alternatives like Play Framework, Spring Boot, Vert.x or whatever else floats your boat.

I couldn't disagree more. If you like the concept of type safety, don't waste your time.

You called out the fact that you see repeating patterns in the industry, and go on to mention Node.js as a great environment for rapid prototyping. That made me chuckle because that's exactly what I heard about RoR just a few years ago.

There is no such a thing as 'outgrowing Node.js'.

Often, people who think that they're "too good" for Node.js are people who had a single bad experience; they designed their Node.js app poorly (E.g. they didn't think through their architecture enough) and then instead of blaming themselves for their ignorance, they put all blame Node.js.

It's always convenient to blame the tool. But I've used a lot of different tools and I can tell you that the tool is almost never the problem.

I've found that people who don't like Node.js are often people who were forced to learn it because their company used it. These people had resentment against Node.js from the very beginning - And they kept this resentment with them while they were 'learning' it - And as a result, they never really learned it properly - They never fully understood it.

Not everyone has to love Node.js but there is no reason to hate it either. It's a damn good tool.

    It's always convenient to blame the tool. But I've used a
    lot of different tools and I can tell you that the tool 
    is almost never the problem.

This is both true and also misses the point. Given a sufficiently smart software engineer Javascript is fine. But like the old adage about compilers the joke is that there is no sufficiently smart engineer. Even the best will occasionally make mistakes. Over time those mistakes will accumulate. When enough of them accumulate you experience serious pain.

Any argument that rests on the idea that all you have to do is: "Just hire engineers that can be perfect in perpetuity" is doomed to be a poor one. No language is perfect, however there do exist lanaguages that make it possible to fix problems after the fact with higher levels of confidence and more guarantees. Javascript is not one of those languages.

Not to mention that single threaded callbacks have an inherently lower ceiling on concurrency that multithreaded approaches. Some times you have to make the decision on whether to save thousands-millions of dollars on infrastructure so you can stick with your current codebase or to rewrite and take a medium term hit on velocity instead.

There most definitely is such a thing as outgrowing Node.js.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com