Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Readability part II - comments |
| Date | 2015-04-16 18:00 +0000 |
| Organization | Friends of the Galactic Collective |
| Message-ID | <yuOp7T.5UT.K5Iuf@gmail.com> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <mgo57f$85h$1@dont-email.me> <mgo5p7$9lt$1@dont-email.me> <mgo6pv$djl$1@dont-email.me> <mgo77v$ek9$1@dont-email.me> <mgo86j$i4m$1@dont-email.me> |
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 08:00:13AM -0400, James Kuyper wrote: > On 04/16/2015 07:43 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote: > > On 16/04/15 12:36, James Kuyper wrote: > >> On 04/16/2015 07:18 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote: > >>> On 16/04/15 12:09, James Kuyper wrote: > >>> > >>> <snip> > >>> > >>>> If we were to require English fluency of all programmers, we'd > >>> > be in big trouble. > >>> > >>> Yes. We'd have to fix the education system. It's a terrible thought, > >>> isn't it? > >> > >> How would that help? None of the people I'm referring to used our > >> education system - they used their home country's education system, > >> which we have no power to fix. > > > > > > But if we fixed /our/ education system (for local values of "our"), we > > wouldn't need to import programmers. This would be good for our local > > economy. And if /their/ education system (for local values of "their") > > were to stop them from being able to export programmers, perhaps they'd > > fix /their/ education system too, so that they could. I see wins all round. > > We're importing their programmers because their education system is > producing programmers good enough that we're willing to import them. Is > that really evidence that their education system needs fixing? I've seen > other evidence to suggest that, but this isn't part of that evidence. I > think it's their economies which need fixing, to produce sufficient > native demand for programmers that it would be prohibitively expensive > for us to import them. This discussion is occuring without a metric of language competence. I propose a scale. The unit will be the Fred Flinstone. Thus Pauly Shore measures about 0.6 Flinstones on the language competence scale. Margaret Atwood rates about 9.1. The question is: How many Flintstones must I achieve to be considered literate? At any rate importing programmers from foreign countries proceeds for a variety of reasons, some of which are purely monetary. The concern is with absolute competence, and me must take into account the competence of those who are doing the hiring. Regards, Steve Thompson -- "If I had a nickel for every time some idiot called me about a computer problem that turned out to be user error, I would be able to retire and spend the rest of my days cultivating clues in my backyard hillside garden." -- MysteryDog in 24hoursupport.helpdesk.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Readability part II - comments Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-15 11:48 -0700
Re: Readability part II - comments David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-16 10:42 +0200
Re: Readability part II - comments Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-16 22:01 +1200
Re: Readability part II - comments Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-16 11:40 +0100
Re: Readability part II - comments James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-16 07:09 -0400
Re: Readability part II - comments Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-16 12:18 +0100
Re: Readability part II - comments James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-16 07:36 -0400
Re: Readability part II - comments Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-16 12:43 +0100
Re: Readability part II - comments James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-16 08:00 -0400
Re: Readability part II - comments Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-16 13:21 +0100
Re: Readability part II - comments James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-16 10:54 -0400
Re: Readability part II - comments Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-16 16:45 +0100
Re: Readability part II - comments Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 18:00 +0000
Re: Readability part II - comments Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-04-16 04:52 -0700
Re: Readability part II - comments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-16 16:40 +0100
Re: Readability part II - comments Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-04-18 03:33 -0700
Re: Readability part II - comments Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-04-16 21:10 -0500
Re: Readability part II - comments Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-16 17:20 +0100
Re: Readability part II - comments Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-16 17:53 +0100
Re: Readability part II - comments Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 17:34 +0000
Re: Readability part II - comments Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-16 19:15 +0100
Re: Readability part II - comments Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 18:25 +0000
Re: Readability part II - comments David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-16 12:45 +0200
Re: Readability part II - comments Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-04-16 17:31 +0000
Re: Readability part II - comments David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-17 10:48 +0200
Re: Readability part II - comments Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-04-18 06:35 +0000
Re: Readability part II - comments Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-18 19:47 +1200
Re: Readability part II - comments Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-04-18 12:54 +0000
Re: Readability part II - comments Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-19 08:43 +1200
Re: Readability part II - comments Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-19 12:36 +1200
Re: Readability part II - comments Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-04-20 13:58 +0000
Re: Readability part II - comments Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-04-20 21:02 +0000
Re: Readability part II - comments Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-04-20 23:38 +0000
Re: Readability part II - comments Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-04-21 01:12 +0000
Re: Readability part II - comments Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-21 16:39 +1200
Re: Readability part II - comments Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-04-18 14:21 -0400
Re: Readability part II - comments August Karlstrom <fusionfile@gmail.com> - 2015-04-16 19:18 +0200
Re: Readability part II - comments Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-04-17 16:16 +0000
Re: Readability part II - comments John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2015-04-20 09:19 -0700
Re: Readability part II - comments asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-04-20 11:15 -0700
Re: Readability part II - comments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-04-20 11:37 -0700
Re: Readability part II - comments Steve Thompson <stevet810@gmail.com> - 2015-04-22 02:02 +0000
Re: Readability part II - comments David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-04-22 09:48 -0700
Re: Readability part II - comments Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-21 12:40 -0700
Re: Readability part II - comments Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-04-21 21:24 +0000
Re: Readability part II - comments Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-23 21:57 -0700
Re: Readability part II - comments "Skybuck Flying" <skybuck2000@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-24 09:14 +0200
csiph-web