| |||||||||||||
That's computer science, I guessThat's computer science, I guessPosted Aug 12, 2011 21:19 UTC (Fri) by ncm (subscriber, #165)Parent article: Avoiding the OS abstraction trap All problems in computer engineering can be solved by another level of indirection -- except sluggishness. That's the difference between computer science and computer engineering. Understanding of that difference is what I probe in interviews.
(Log in to post comments)
That's computer science, I guess Posted Aug 13, 2011 0:29 UTC (Sat) by ringerc (subscriber, #3071) [Link]
Except sluggishness, maintainability, reliability and compiled binary size.
Over-abstraction has plenty of costs. I've been guilty of it enough to know.
That's computer science, I guess Posted Aug 14, 2011 19:36 UTC (Sun) by nowster (subscriber, #67) [Link]
Except sluggishness, maintainability, reliability, compiled binary size and a fanatical devotion to quoting Monty Python scripts.
I'll come in again...
That's computer science, I guess Posted Aug 13, 2011 2:22 UTC (Sat) by elanthis (guest, #6227) [Link]
The real problem that most CS grads have is that they don't understand the difference between "adding layers of abstraction" and "coding to the abstraction."
More layers of abstraction is rarely useful. Building the _correct_ layers of abstraction is massively useful. If you feel that you need another layer, you should first check and make sure that the layer(s) you already have isn't just a poor design for the task at hand.
|
|||||||||||||