Overview

Programming languages are the tools that we use to communicate with computers to get them to do our bidding. Of the four most well-known programming language paradigms, only object-oriented programming (such as in Python and Java) is commonly seen outside of this course here at Carleton. To better understand other programming language paradigms, we will program in two other main paradigms: functional programming (Racket), and imperative programming (C). In doing so, the goal is to gain an understanding of characteristics from each, and to appreciate that each has made different trade-offs in design reflecting the creators' goals. Additionally, practice at these dramatically different approaches to programming help making learn new languages easier to do. Moreover, we will develop in C an interpreter for Racket, in order to see how a programming langauge interpreter can actually be constructed.

Instructor Information

• Instructor: Dave Musicant
• Office: CMC 326
• E-mail: dmusican
• Office phone: (507)222-4369
• Office hours: check my web page
• Graders: Will Schifeling (schifelw), Richard Lin (linr)

Textbooks

• Programming Language Pragmatics, 3rd edition by Michael L. Scott. Morgan Kaufmann, 2009.
• Optional but highly recommended: Programming in C (3rd Edition), Stephen G. Kochan. Sams Publishing, 2004.

Exams, dates, etc

• Exam 1: Wednesday, October 15
• Exam 2: Wednesday, November 19

Your Grade

• Assignments: 60%
• Exam 1: 20%
• Exam 2: 20%

Homework Policy

• Each assignment will have a specific time for which it will be due. An assignment turned in late within one day of the due time will be docked 25%. A program turned in later than one day of the due date but within two days will be docked 50%. A programming assignment turned in any time after this until the last day of classes will be docked 75%. Non-programming assignments can not be turned in any later than two days following the due date since we may be discussing answers in class.

Working Together

• Each programming assignment will either be a "team" problem assignment or an "individual" assignment. I will assign one or partners to each of you so that you can work together on the team problems. You should work alone on the individual problems.
• Because you will be working in a team, I will ask you to give honest and thorough feedback about the contributions of you and your teammates. Providing an honest appraisal of your peers is difficult, but it's also important. Your contribution to your team, as measured both by peer evaluations and by my observations, will contribute to your grade.

Collaboration, Plagiarism, and the Difference Between the Two

There are two different kinds of working together: collaborating and plagiarism.

Collaborating

• Collaborating is good.
• You are encouraged to collaborate on ideas and program design.
• Programming is often a social effort, and there is much you can learn by talking out the ideas in this class with each other.
• You can by all means talk to each other, look at each others' programs to help fix problems, and share ideas.

Plagiarism

• Plagiarism is bad. DON'T DO IT!
• Any programs that you turn in should be your work.
• Even if you work with someone else and share ideas, you must still writ your own program.
• If a piece of your program utilizes someone else's idea, you must make sure to give that person credit in program comments.
• Do not hand a printout of your program to other students. I encourage you to work together to help debug your code, but you should do so sitting together.

The following are examples of plagiarism:

• Taking someone else's program, changing comments and variable names, putting your name at the top, and turning it in.
• Finding a similar program on the Internet, changing the variables and comments around, putting your name at the top, and turning it in.
• Finding a similar program in a book, changing the variables and comments around, putting your name at the top, and turning it in.

I am compelled by Carleton policy to submit plagiarism cases that I find to the Dean of Students, who in turns brings the evidence before the Academic Standing Committee. The academic penalty for a finding of responsibility can range from a grade of zero in the specific assignment to a F in the course.