More trouble with programming
-
-
Good read. This is my favorite part: TR: Computer languages remain generally difficult to learn. One might argue that for computers to become more than "helper" tools that enable mass computations and widespread communications, they must evolve again--and one key may be in simplifying the process of coding so that more individuals are able to participate in development. BS: I think that would be misguided. The idea of programming as a semiskilled task, practiced by people with a few months' training, is dangerous. We wouldn't tolerate plumbers or accountants that poorly educated. We don't have as an aim that architecture (of buildings) and engineering (of bridges and trains) should become more accessible to people with progressively less training. Indeed, one serious problem is that currently, too many software developers are undereducated and undertrained.
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
-
Good read. This is my favorite part: TR: Computer languages remain generally difficult to learn. One might argue that for computers to become more than "helper" tools that enable mass computations and widespread communications, they must evolve again--and one key may be in simplifying the process of coding so that more individuals are able to participate in development. BS: I think that would be misguided. The idea of programming as a semiskilled task, practiced by people with a few months' training, is dangerous. We wouldn't tolerate plumbers or accountants that poorly educated. We don't have as an aim that architecture (of buildings) and engineering (of bridges and trains) should become more accessible to people with progressively less training. Indeed, one serious problem is that currently, too many software developers are undereducated and undertrained.
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
Steve Echols wrote:
We don't have as an aim that architecture (of buildings) and engineering (of bridges and trains) should become more accessible to people with progressively less training
He is the man! At least some sanity in the debate.
-
Steve Echols wrote:
We don't have as an aim that architecture (of buildings) and engineering (of bridges and trains) should become more accessible to people with progressively less training
He is the man! At least some sanity in the debate.
Pierre Leclercq wrote:
He is the man! At least some sanity in the debate.
Yeah! Sadly, I see .NET bringing programming to the masses, like VB/VBA brought it in the '90s (I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but...it's true). C# is the next VB, look at the questions in the C# forum. With C/C++, you have to know what you're doing, which I think is a dying art. (Again, look at the questions in the C++ forum :)) Anyway, it's a good read.
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
-
Pierre Leclercq wrote:
He is the man! At least some sanity in the debate.
Yeah! Sadly, I see .NET bringing programming to the masses, like VB/VBA brought it in the '90s (I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but...it's true). C# is the next VB, look at the questions in the C# forum. With C/C++, you have to know what you're doing, which I think is a dying art. (Again, look at the questions in the C++ forum :)) Anyway, it's a good read.
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
Oh man - You wouldn't know how long I've been waiting for somebody else to say that! :)
-
Pierre Leclercq wrote:
He is the man! At least some sanity in the debate.
Yeah! Sadly, I see .NET bringing programming to the masses, like VB/VBA brought it in the '90s (I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but...it's true). C# is the next VB, look at the questions in the C# forum. With C/C++, you have to know what you're doing, which I think is a dying art. (Again, look at the questions in the C++ forum :)) Anyway, it's a good read.
- S 50 cups of coffee and you know it's on!
Steve Echols wrote:
Sadly, I see .NET bringing programming to the masses
That's not the way I see it. I see it as a way of enabling greater abstraction and separation of concerns. This might incidentally make it easier for the masses but my take is that the aim is to make it easier for professional developers. With C++ you can also achieve equivalent abstraction and separation of concerns but it requires greater effort.
Steve Echols wrote:
With C/C++, you have to know what you're doing
You have to know what you're doing at a lower level and you have to be less error-prone than the average developer. You still have to know what you're doing with higher level languages but in a different way.
Kevin
-
Great article! "The idea of programming as a semiskilled task, practiced by people with a few months' training, is dangerous. We wouldn't tolerate plumbers or accountants that poorly educated." Amen to that! ".Net is a huge integrated system backed by Microsoft. That's its major advantage and disadvantage. ... Obviously, suppliers of huge integrated systems, such as .Net and Java, see things differently. Their [Microsoft's] claim is that what they provide is worth more to users than independence." An excellent observation. Imho, Microsoft is probably in no hurry to ensure the availability of a robust, high-performance .NET runtime on U*x, being that a large percentage of its revenue (and profits) comes from the sale of Windows licenses. /ravi
My new year's resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Music | Articles | Freeware | Trips ravib(at)ravib(dot)com
