[analog31]

The difference is, one is not a science, and the other is not engineering. ;-)

There has always been a dilemma about what to do with bright young people who want to become computer programmers, but who also want to get a college degree.

My mom taught a programming course at a satellite campus of a state university in the 80s. The course was listed in the computer science department, but it was basically Programming 101. Her students were mostly grown-ups. Her students didn't face the dilemma because they already had college degrees, or they didn't. They were getting programming jobs after one year in the course.

My mom's advice to me was that programming was too easy to justify 4 years of college level training, and that I should major in something "real" to use her words. (She has a masters in chemistry). But actually her idea was to use college as a way to build up domain knowledge that could add value on top of programming skill. She thought there would be a need to be able to differentiate myself from the likely flood of people who were taking the 1 year course and getting programming jobs.

This post would come close to trolling if it weren't for the fact that there remain ongoing debates to this day, even in HN threads, about the merit and need for college level training to become a programmer. I'm not the only person wondering about this -- it's a real and hard problem. I actually like the idea of a decent career path for someone who is not interested or cut out to succeed in the college environment, even though I thrived in that environment myself.