算法与计算机科学plato.stanford.edu
计算机科学哲学（2017）
The Philosophy of Computer Science (2017)
2012 — 2020，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
这是斯坦福哲学百科（SEP）关于“计算机科学哲学”的条目，梳理计算机科学作为学科的性质、程序的本体论地位、计算机科学的知识论地位，以及理论与工程实践之间的关系等根本问题。它更像一份权威的哲学综述，而不是具体编程技术文章。
为什么经久不衰：它把程序员日常面对的抽象、正确性、程序究竟是什么等问题放进哲学框架，且 SEP 条目权威、常读常新，所以多年反复登上首页。
HN 评论精选
用“区分”与《形式法则》解释逻辑和计算的基础，并引 Dijkstra 的笑话谈形式系统研究的衰落。
“计算机科学可以被称为后图灵时代对形式系统研究的衰落。”（这是我最喜欢的笑话之一，我猜是 Dijkstra 的。）顺带一提，这一切的基础是做出区分的行为。“起初是虚空，虚空无形。”从操作层面说，如果大脑中做区分的东西被抑制（比如中风），你真的会失去区分身体与世界的能力，进入一种“海洋般的极乐”。语义上，区分是产生逻辑（因而产生计算机及计算机科学）所需的唯一行为。参见《形式法则》。
carapace查看英文原文
"Computer science could be called the post-Turing decline in the study of formal systems." (One of my favorite jokes. Dijkstra's I think.) FWIW, the foundation of it all is the act of making a distinction. "In the beginning was the void, and the void was without form." Operationally, if the thing in your brain that makes distinctions is suppressed (by e.g. a stroke) you literally lose the ability to distinguish between your body and the world and enter into an "oceanic bliss". > "My Stroke of Insight: A Brain Scientistʼs Personal Journey", (2008) is a New York Times bestselling and award-winning book written by Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor, a Harvard-trained and published neuroanatomist. In it, she tells of her experience in 1996 of having a stroke in her left hemisphere and how the human brain creates our perception of reality and includes tips about how Dr. Taylor rebuilt her own brain from the inside out. ~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Stroke_of_Insight (There's also a TED talk.) Semantically, distinction is the sole act required to produce logic (and therefore computers and teh science thereof.) See "Laws of Form". > "Laws of Form" is a book by G. Spencer-Brown, published in 1969, that straddles the boundary between mathematics and philosophy. ~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_Form
用真、善、美三个维度反思编程：正确性、用途伦理与审美。
我最近觉得一个有用的框架，是用经典哲学关切来思考程序员的工作：真、善、美。也就是说，软件开发有智识、道德和审美三个维度。对我而言，智识问题主要是程序正确性：代码有没有 bug、是否健壮稳定；我倾向 Dijkstra 和 Hoare“计算机科学作为数学”的认识论，用不变式、归纳推理、时序逻辑；至少在单个函数层面，可以严谨表达意图并推理实现满足意图，而且每行代码都有测试。Knuth 有句名言：“不要相信下面的代码。我只证明了它正确，没有测试它！”道德问题关乎代码为何设计、将被用于何处；我现在做医疗设备嵌入式软件，道德维度具体而有意义；我曾做 B-2 轰炸机航电开发工具，虽不认为那一定不道德，但对我更是持续的焦虑来源。审美问题似乎有两个……
gregfjohnson查看英文原文
A framework I have recently found useful for thinking about my work as a computer programmer is a classic set of philosophical concerns: Truth, goodness, and beauty. That is to say, software development has an intellectual dimension, a moral dimension, and an aesthetic dimension. For me, the intellectual questions primarily concern program correctness. Is this code bug-free? Is it robust and stable? I tend toward the "computer science as mathematics" epistemology of Dijkstra and Hoare. Invariants; inductive reasoning; temporal logic. At least at the level of individual functions, I find that it is feasible to express with rigor and clarity what the function is intended to do, and to reason with precision through to a conclusion that the implementation fulfills the intent. And, there is a test for every line of code. A favorite quote from Knuth: "Don't trust the following code. I have only proven it correct, I have not tested it!" The moral questions concern the uses for which the code is designed, and the uses to which it will be put. I work on medical device embedded software these days, and the moral dimension of this work is a very meaningful and concrete benefit of this choice. I used to work on software development tools to support avionics development for the B-2 bomber. While I don't dismiss the latter as unambiguously immoral, it certainly was more problematic for me, an ongoing source of angst and struggle. The aesthetic issues seem to me to be two-fold: how beautiful is the software from the standpoint of the user? And, how beautiful is the source code? I have seen (and written) much code that is frankly an ugly mess. I have also upon occasion had an inspiration about how to re-write a piece of code. Tons of code gets deleted, and the new code is simple, clean, elegant, and inevitable. I would go so far as to claim that at times I have been graced to write code that turned out to be beautiful and aesthetically pleasing. It seems to me that the "Clean Code" movement encourages creation of code that is elegant and beautiful. I find that this triad of concerns inter-relate. Beautiful code is more likely to be correct, and conversely. Mindfully written code that is done with clarity and integrity tends to be both more beautiful and correct.
推荐 Rapaport 的计算机科学哲学论文作为补充资源，并指出该 SEP 条目多次引用他。
另见 William J. Rapaport（SUNY Buffalo 计算机科学荣休教授）的《Philosophy of Computer Science》：http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~rapaport/Papers/phics.pdf。讨论过：https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10388603（2015）、https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20912718（6 个月前）。Rapaport 在 Plato 条目中被多次引用。
dredmorbius查看英文原文
See also William J. Rapaport, emeritus professor of computer science at SUNY Buffalo, Philosophy of Computer Science: http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~rapaport/Papers/phics.pdf Discussed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10388603 (2015) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20912718 (6 mos ago) Rapaport is cited numerous times in the Plato article.
批评该条目脱离实践，缺乏从现实经验到抽象洞见的可验证路径。
真正有趣的哲学从战壕和战场中涌现。例如，关于随机性最令人惊讶的元层洞见，来自 Nassim Taleb 十年证券交易经验；他写的东西确实惊人。然而链接文章没有提及这类现实起点，未能从非常实践的东西中浮现，也没有逐步抽象掉细节以抵达元层惊人洞见；可验证的路径干脆消失了。它更像是平庸教学艺术的例子。我个人认为它读来无用。
neokantian查看英文原文
The really interesting philosophies emerge from the trenches and the battles in the field. For example, the most surprising meta-level insights on randomness come from Nassim Taleb's decade-long experience in trading securities. What he writes, is truly striking. The article in the link, however, make no reference to such real-world starting points. It fails to emerge from the very practical. It does not gradually abstract away details in order to arrive at surprising insights at the meta-level. The verifiable path is simply gone. It is much more an example in the art of mediocre teaching. I personally think that it is a useless read.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
位运算技巧集
Bit Twiddling Hacks
斯坦福页面上的经典位运算技巧合集，收录了 popcount、前导/尾随零、位反转、交换、舍入等大量技巧，并附有解释和性能讨论。
算法与计算机科学上首页 8 次 · 2011–2024graphics.stanford.edu编辑精选如何不按平均评分排序
How Not To Sort By Average Rating
经典文章解释了为什么按平均评分排序不可靠：只有少量评价的条目（比如仅一条五星）会轻易排到最前，而评价数量的差异被忽略。
算法与计算机科学上首页 7 次 · 2009–2024evanmiller.org编辑精选数据结构可视化
Data Structure Visualizations
旧金山大学 David Galles 教授制作的数据结构与算法交互式可视化网站，涵盖 B 树、红黑树、排序、图算法等，可逐步操作观察其运行过程。
算法与计算机科学上首页 6 次 · 2011–2021cs.usfca.edu编辑精选1996 年以来的计算机科学最佳论文奖
Best Paper Awards in Computer Science since 1996
Jeff Huang 维护的一个汇总页面，收录了自 1996 年以来计算机科学各主要会议的“最佳论文奖”获奖名单，并按年份和会议整理，方便读者一站式浏览历届获奖论文。
算法与计算机科学上首页 6 次 · 2010–2018jeffhuang.com编辑精选算法（Jeff Erickson）
Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson
伊利诺伊大学 Jeff Erickson 教授的算法课教材，免费在线开放。
算法与计算机科学上首页 5 次 · 2018–2022jeffe.cs.illinois.edu编辑精选