Entry Hart:1998:FPF from sigcse1990.bib

Last update: Wed Sep 26 02:07:32 MDT 2018                Valid HTML 4.0!

Index sections

Top | Symbols | Numbers | Math | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

BibTeX entry

@Article{Hart:1998:FPF,
  author =       "Hal Hart and Jim Caristi and Robert Dewar and Mark
                 Gerhardt and Drew Hamilton and Christopher Haynes and
                 Sam Rebelsky",
  title =        "The future of programming-are fundamental changes in
                 computer science programs coming? (panel)",
  journal =      j-SIGCSE,
  volume =       "30",
  number =       "1",
  pages =        "370--371",
  month =        mar,
  year =         "1998",
  CODEN =        "SIGSD3",
  DOI =          "https://doi.org/10.1145/274790.274337",
  ISSN =         "0097-8418 (print), 2331-3927 (electronic)",
  ISSN-L =       "0097-8418",
  bibdate =      "Sat Nov 17 16:56:29 MST 2012",
  bibsource =    "http://portal.acm.org/;
                 http://www.math.utah.edu/pub/tex/bib/sigcse1990.bib",
  abstract =     "Computer programming languages (and their dominance as
                 the means of software development) have been one of the
                 most high-profile topics in the 50-year history of
                 computing --- reaching mature technology and
                 achievements for language definition, translation,
                 usage, analysis, pedagogical approaches, etc. and in
                 terms of their general impact on computing systems This
                 reality has continuously driven the content of Computer
                 Science curriculums to feature programming languages,
                 their definition techniques, and their translation
                 methods as the subject of many core courses, and their
                 usage as a tool to carry out the teaching of the
                 principles in most other courses. The objective of this
                 panel is to, at just past the mid-point of the first
                 century of computing, debate whether this pre-eminent
                 role of programming languages will continue
                 straightforwardly in the second half-century, if
                 radically new styles of programming languages will
                 emerge and dominate, or if programming languages will
                 recede to minor importance compared to alternate
                 software-development paradigms in both usage and
                 teaching impact. And, for each of those propositions,
                 to assess the impacts for change in typical CS
                 curriculums. For most software domains today, so-called
                 3rd-generation programming languages (e.g., Ada,
                 Scheme, Pascal, C/C++, Modula 2, COBOL, FORTRAN, and
                 recently, Java) enjoy considerable portability between
                 computers and are now widely accepted. In these
                 ``procedural'' languages programmers still are
                 responsible for designing and coding the software
                 architectures, algorithms, logic, and most data
                 structures to solve the problems. For some
                 well-understood domains (e.g., report writing,
                 inventory control, and some financial programming),
                 4th-generation languages (4GLs) or ``non-procedural''
                 languages are established which essentially allow users
                 to specify ``requirements'' instead of software
                 solutions, with 4GL compilers that generate code
                 satisfying the requirements; the number of domains for
                 which 4GLs are appropriate increases steadily as domain
                 understanding increases. 5th-generation or automatic
                 programming approaches have been a research topic for
                 many years, with some promising results demonstrated in
                 constrained domains, although the distinction from a
                 4GL to a 5th-generation language (5GL) is less clear
                 than the earlier transitions. Technologies for formally
                 representing and translating programming languages, and
                 the concepts and methods for teaching their effective
                 application, have continually evolved with the
                 programming language trends, and are generally regarded
                 in the body of crystallized core CS concepts.",
  acknowledgement = ack-nhfb,
  fjournal =     "SIGCSE Bulletin (ACM Special Interest Group on
                 Computer Science Education)",
  journal-URL =  "http://portal.acm.org/browse_dl.cfm?idx=J688",
}

Related entries