Hot answers tagged

14

Don't let yourself be fooled by the similarity in names: these are pretty different topics, with different audiences. Computer science is a broad subject, with a somewhat misleading names because it's not just about computers: computing science would be a better name. Computing refers to applying systematic treatment to information. Computational science, ...


14

Sure, programming language design is one of the things computer scientists do. You'll find programming language design questions under tags such as programming-languages, typing, type-checking, type-inference, compilers, interpreters, etc. as well as under tags for specific programming paradigms such as constraint-programming, functional-programming, meta-...


13

Analysis of the questions on the proposal I went and analyzed the 40 questions with score 10 and above that define the proposal, checking their suitability for Computer Science. When creating a programming language, should I choose an LL or LR grammar? Too broad as is. Squarely on-topic once edited to add information about the language. What are the ...


12

The way I was taught -- yay, one data point! -- questions about how to build CPUs from (abstract) gates (and that includes flip-flops) is part of computer architecture. Construction or physical properties of gates, on the other hand, would be offtopic.


11

We do have the programming-languages and language-design tags. As long as your questions fall into these categories and are (mostly) language-agnostic they are very welcome!


11

There have been a number of past discussions of this. Based on the outcomes of those discussions, my reading is that asking for implementations of an algorithm is off-topic. Others may have a different view; I don't know. To get an sense of past discussions, you could start by taking a look at Is asking for implementation (any language) or detailed ...


10

Frankly, this is what teachers and teaching assistants are paid for. You can also ask peers or more advanced learners you trust. Reviewing material is generally a bad fit for this platform: it's a task that requires lots of reading (as opposed to a snappy, self-contained question) and has no clear-cut answers. You may also want to consider carefully if ...


9

I am deeply ambivalent. I love cs.se, but we haven't been able to attract the critical mass of OS experts required to make a vibrant community, and we only rarely get good OS questions. (Look at the operating-systems tag, of the 17 questions with a score of 5 or above, 16 were asked in 2012, and the one that was asked in 2013 is closed as off-topic.) ...


8

Anything classically considered computer science is OK for CS.SE. For instance: Operating system is on-topic. Computer architecture is on-topic. (Note that this might potentially include some questions that could be classified as "hardware", so one implication is that I'm arguing that the "hardware vs. software" distinction probably isn't the right one.) ...


8

In principle, your questions would be right at home on this site. However, note that you should post good questions only. Some problematic types of questions are "Please solve this exercise for me." "Please check my proof/solution." A good question focuses on a specific problem (e.g. "I got this far with this exercise, and now I am stuck. I feel like A ...


7

They are topics in theoretical computer science so they are on-topic here. If you think your question may receive a more suitable answer here feel free to ask moderators on Math.SE to migrate them. If the question is not yours then the issue is more complicated. The question would be on-topic here but migrating a question is a decision that should be made ...


7

My view is that computer science starts just after the level of flip-flops. It is oblivious to whether the computer is implemented using electronics or, say, optically. I think we can all agree that a discussion of MOSFET is inappropriate here. While flip-flops are one level above this, it is still one level below even CPU implementation.


7

EDITED: I added a second criterion below. There are some questions which are clearly off-topic. There are also some questions that are borderline. For a borderline question between math and cs, I would use the criteria: Is this question much more likely to get a good answer in math.SE than in cs.SE? Is the answer to this question likely to be useful in the ...


7

Programming language design is on topic, though some people are rather keen on suggesting that anything related to programming should be closed. I, for one, welcome more programming languages questions.


7

Thanks for coming here to raise the issue, share your perspective, and ask how to improve your question. I'll share my personal perspective (with the understanding that others might not agree with it). I'm inclined to agree with closure of that question in its current form. I'd prefer to see this site for focused questions that admit an objective answer --...


6

Broadly speaking, let me divide this into two kinds of questions: (a) conceptual questions about some particular architecture (e.g., Mano, MIX, etc.), or (b) coding questions, involving writing code for that architecture. I would propose that coding questions should be off-topic, even if they are asking for code targeted at a theoretical model. For ...


6

I look at the following questions to decide if a question is on-topic (unless explicitly made off-topic for some reason by a policy): Is there a good reason to think that the question is likely to receive a satisfying answer from computer scientists? Is there a good reason to think that answering the question requires the expertise of computer scientists? ...


6

I don't think there is a clear hard line where computer science ends and electrical engineering starts, as there is no clear hard line where CS ends and say mathematics starts. CS by its nature is very interdisciplinary. CS.SE shares scope with many other sites: Math.SE, Crypto.SE, CompSci.SE, Stats.SE, etc. EE.SE is just one of these. Computer architecture ...


6

It's hard to tell exactly what you want to ask, so I'll give some guidelines. You need to ask a specific, focused question. "Here's my design, do you have any feedback?" probably isn't a great fit for our site format. An open-ended request for caveats, pitfalls, or potential issues in your specific design probably isn't a great fit. This site isn't for ...


6

Thanks for asking! You don't really say what you want to ask, but in all likelihood such a question would be too broad, primarily opinion-based, and offtopic if it's more about the writing than the content. Narrowly scoped, factual questions about computer science parts of your theses are ontopic here, and about the technicalities of writing theses may ...


5

In my opinion, that question is very borderline. While logic circuits are ON-TOPIC, the focus of CS is about the function they compute and the resources it takes. The question we discuss was going to the region of low-level implementation, where the main issue is implementation and stability, issues which are not really CS. (For instance, there are several ...


5

Yeah, we do have a bit of a problem. Computer scientists know very well what computer science is about, but non-computer scientists don't. The definition doesn't lend itself well to bullet points. To make things more complex, the names are confusing: computer science isn't the science of computers, and isn't the same thing as computational science. We've ...


5

That question was pretty clearly a Coq-specific question: defining a "get n-th" function in Coq will be all but useless to a beginner in, say, Agda. How does pattern matching work in dependently typed languages would be a much better question. Also: the Coq mailing list is really good at answering Coq-specific questions, and is appropriate, so I don't see ...


5

As far as I am concerned, the principles of testing are a part of software engineering (here the academic field, not the profession) which is in turn a part of computer science¹. Therefore, questions that asks about principles of testing, e.g. strategies for random testing, automatic generation of meaningful test cases, combinatoric testing, measures of ...


5

Background: I'm a former computer scientist (not in an OS-related field), current developer working on an in-house OS, and I've been around Stack Exchange quite a bit (including being a moderator of the Computer Science SE site). I do not feel any need for an Operating Systems site. When it comes to OS design, engineering questions go on Stack Overflow, and ...


5

That's probably too broad to be a good fit. It doesn't sound like the sort of thing that can be answered in a few paragraphs. At the level you're talking about, a field might have hundreds or thousands of researchers working on it, so a list of all challenges that someone considers major might be quite lengthy. Also, which challenges are major or ...


4

Theoretical computer science is for mathematicians working in the field of theoretical computer science, at the level of graduate student and upwards. It accepts only research-level questions. Computer science, in contrast, is for all levels of theoretical computer science, defined somewhat more broadly than in TCS. Many questions here are homework ...


4

One observation: a majority of the users are actively involved in StackOverflow, a very practically-oriented site dealing with issues of implementation and specifics. Fewer than 10% are involved in any given "scientific" site (Mathematics/TCS/CS/etc.) While the questions in the proposal might be on-topic here, there might be a bias in the proposal stage for ...


4

A good rule of thumb in these situations may be whether the question and (good) answers can be written without invoking (or relying upon) laws of physics. As such, I think the question that spawned this discussion is either on-topic, or very close to being on-topic. If anything, some clarification about the construction of this flip-flop in terms of basic ...


4

Let's break it down: Asking for an open-source implementation is off-topic. Asking for an open-source implementation to do X is equivalent to asking for a software package to do X. They're both off-topic here. See https://cs.meta.stackexchange.com/a/31/755 for a relevant policy statement: "[asking] for a complete software package [...] is definitely out ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible