This person's goals seem to be different from yours. Why not let him or her study what they're interested in without acting as if it's a mistake? What you see as a mistake in degree choice is based on your experience coming from your school living your life.
If the individual's goals were to be a computer scientist, then all is well. But if by their own statements of what they want out of computer science it is clear that they will not find there, or only find as a very small part of CS along the overhead of everything else, like the minor in mathematics that usually automatically comes with a CS degree, which they did not expect, then maybe it's ok that I offer a little insight into what CS really is. Because it's math, and anyone interested in CS must understand this, that CS is math, and programming is not computer science, and that studying computer science does not mean becoming intimately familiar with how a computer works. It's pretty important.
I actually graduated around 5 months ago. The only thing that makes me sad is that I don't have a job yet and am finding it difficult to find one because there are no opportunities where I live (like seriously not a single C++ job exists in my country only .net - HELP ME).
The math itself maps to a higher abstraction when it comes to compilers. Focusing more on parsing, grammars and automata theory. CE courses tend to go to a lower level. I enjoy both sides and can see what you're trying to explain. What I got out of university was mostly the feeling that the courses could never go in depth due to the amount of detail and the abstractions that exist. I don't think a CE course would have went to enough depth to cover everything anyways (each course is still just in the realm of 100 hours). Because both the layers on top (Algorithms and computation theory) and the bottom (hardware) both have so much information that it can be daunting to try to learn all of it.
I do agree that it might be a pain point for some people who don't enjoy that part of CS. I'm curious how you came to regret it this much?
> I'm curious how you came to regret it this much?
I'm not sure regret is the right word, but I am cynical because I was actively recruited by my university's CS dept. and it took me 2 years of study before I realized I was actually studying math, not computers, which was what I thought I was supposed to be studying. But I was mistaken, and it was too late to switch to CE and hope to graduate before the end of the decade. If I had been wise at 17yo, I would have known CE was what I thought CS was. Maybe I would not have worked in the field, but I sure would know a lot more about electronics and engineering, which was really were my young interests lay, I just didn't know any better.
Programming jobs pay pretty well, but if you have your CS degree, you can earn about 20% more starting out by landing a job as a computer scientist, or at least one that advertises for one. Programming is really a part of the IT field, but computer science isn't necessarily. For instance, the FAA uses computer scientists, so does the National Weather Service, so do major automobile manufacturers, the aerospace industry uses computer scientists. I mean, if programming is your thing, carry on, but you're actually limiting yourself if only seeking C++ programmer positions.
They didn't say anything about not liking maths, and they are specifically on this forum inquiring about a point of how computation can theoretically be done (and one which in this case is extremely relevant to mathematics, if you understood).
I can see that you needed to rant at someone about your revelation that humans can do computation too, but could you not have found a victim whose comment was at least superficially, tangentially related to what you're banging on about?
That's not what I meant. OP states in reply to my comment, "I unironically enjoy CS," followed immediately by, which could be interpreted as qualifying or laying the scope of the previous phrase, "I like programming and I like being close to the metal." That qualifier reveals some misunderstanding about what CS is, because it is not programming (though programming is a tool computer scientists may use) and it has little to nothing to do with "metal" aka hardware (yet another tool). I would have the same reaction to an English major that claimed, "I enjoy studying English. I really love typing and I love word processors." Because that is making the same mistakes as OP. Typing is a tool, word processors are tools, and they are not the study of English, though students of English invariably will utilize typing and word processors.
