<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Code Reads notes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.wordyard.com/2006/11/27/code-reads-notes-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2006/11/27/code-reads-notes-2/</link>
	<description>Technology, politics, culture</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 07 Sep 2008 12:14:32 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Steve Merrick</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2006/11/27/code-reads-notes-2/#comment-365</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Merrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 10:47:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1175#comment-365</guid>
		<description>This is more like it! I enjoy the old papers, and they do have somewhat to offer, but this is closer to my heart. I think of myself first as a designer, secondarily as a *software* designer. I get ANGRY when I see courses in 'design' that are actually courses in the use of a particular programming language. You don't - or shouldn't, IMO - teach OO by teaching C++, Java or Ruby.

Regards,

Steve Merrick</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is more like it! I enjoy the old papers, and they do have somewhat to offer, but this is closer to my heart. I think of myself first as a designer, secondarily as a *software* designer. I get ANGRY when I see courses in &#8216;design&#8217; that are actually courses in the use of a particular programming language. You don&#8217;t - or shouldn&#8217;t, IMO - teach OO by teaching C++, Java or Ruby.</p>
<p>Regards,</p>
<p>Steve Merrick</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
