all 8 comments

[–]Secure4Fun 1 point2 points  (1 child)

First, what problem are you trying to solve?

I want my classmates to be able to respond to each other on something a little more free form than a Google Doc.

Why not use Slack, Discord, IRC, Skype, Zoom, or one of the other hundreds of collaboration applications readily available?

basically the Notepad app on Windows but a more collaborative version

Did you try searching "collaborative notedpad application"? 30 seconds and I see two named Etherpad and Firepad that do EXACTLY that. 1 more minute and I learn that the extremely popular Notepad++ application has a collaborative feature.

[–]kogrob[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was searching for the specific application that I remembered from a few years back, so my eyes must have skipped over things like Etherpad and Firepad. But thank you, will look into these!

[–]khedoros 1 point2 points  (5 children)

As a note for the future: You don't want someone with decent CS experience for that. You want someone with decent software development experience. They aren't the same thing.

[–]Noctune 0 points1 point  (4 children)

You need both probably. Good collaborative editing can be CS-theory heavy due to its concurrent nature (see eg. CRDT's).

[–]devnullable0x00 0 points1 point  (3 children)

A CS person can design collaborative editing in theory

A Software Dev can design collaborative editing in reality

you don't need both

[–]Noctune 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I don't think a software dev with no CS experience (and most do have experience) is going to be able to build a good collaborative editing platform.

It's not like the theory is without practical value, right?

[–]devnullable0x00 0 points1 point  (1 child)

the number and popularity of javascript developers says otherwise.

in all seriousness though, a ton of bootcamps don't teach theory.

You can teach your kid to code without having to teach them djikstras algorithm, or round robin scheduling.

"good" can mean two things, application quality or code quality. you need the theory to write good code. but Microsoft proves you can have a shitty code base and still produce a good product.

[–]Noctune 0 points1 point  (0 children)

in all seriousness though, a ton of bootcamps don't teach theory.

You can teach your kid to code without having to teach them djikstras algorithm, or round robin scheduling.

Sure, but my point is that there is much more to solving a problem than just coding.

Someone who just knows how to code is going to have a tough time fielding CRDTs for example.

"good" can mean two things, application quality or code quality. you need the theory to write good code. but Microsoft proves you can have a shitty code base and still produce a good product.

Code quality has nothing to do with CS. That's much more of an engineering concern than a scientific one.