Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The future is fewer people writing code?

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 256 posts

Re: The future is fewer people writing code?

#241

Post by laumars »

noobermin wrote: post #93
pmlnr wrote: post #6

“50 years from now, I can’t imagine people programming as we do today. It just can’t be." Dear writer, let me introduce you to FORTRAN, COBOL, LISP, or BASIC. These are alive languages, all 50+ years old. Coding didn't change much. The languages, the methodologies, the ideas change, but the approach is the same, and whoever thinks this will soon (50 years is not _that_ far) changes, have never had to debug something…

I've said this before, the reason code and CLI and texting and messaging all these text based modes of communicating and controlling computers are still popular is that they mirror one of the most intuitive and fundamental inventions humans have ever created: language, specifically, written language. Even speech doesn't rival written word in some contexts; for example, laws and organization rules, policies, are still…

I appreciate the context of your argument when you discuss the use of text in by-laws, but it's worth noting that there are lots of examples of by-laws being enforced via non-text mediums:

1) road signs, which are predominantly graphic based

2) public information signs. Eg no smoking. Also usually picture based albeit does often contain text instruction as well

3) beach flags indicating where to swim etc.

All of these are enforcing by-laws yet none specifically text driven. In fact when conveying simple rules to people, it often makes more sense to explain that in meaningful images as that enables anyone to understand the message, even if one doesn't understand the written language (eg tourists).

Re: The future is fewer people writing code?

#242

Post by jononor »

spc476 wrote: post #240
imgabe wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blueprints/schematics are far, far superior at conveying the information they do compared to a written narrative. Given the ease of preparing written text compared to drawing schematics nobody would go to the trouble of doing so if that weren't the case.

It used to be that CPUs were designed with schematics (drawings). Today, they seem to be designed with text (VHDL or Verilog). I wonder why?

Basically all other electronics is developed with schematics though.

Re: The future is fewer people writing code?

#243

Post by jononor »

ISL wrote: post #37

Are there graphical languages that advocates like? The only graphical language that I've encountered professionally is LabVIEW, and I've yet to see an instance/programming style where it has been superior for anything but quick prototyping. A language that's editable in both flowchart and traditional formats could be very useful, if executed in a way that doesn't cripple the traditional side of things.

A designer/fabricator friend developes a CNC CAM system in Grasshopper for Rhino, probably faster than I could in code. It is node-based, but more importantly changes can be made live, and with a 3d-engine available preview/visualization/debugging

Re: The future is fewer people writing code?

#244

Post by spdionis »

wentoodeep wrote: post #223
imgabe wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blueprints/schematics are far, far superior at conveying the information they do compared to a written narrative. Given the ease of preparing written text compared to drawing schematics nobody would go to the trouble of doing so if that weren't the case.

Just imagine a compiler that scans your diagram written by hand on a piece of paper, translate it into AST then interpret it or even produce an executable.

And then realize that your diagram was misinterpreted and you have a big bug in said executable.

Re: The future is fewer people writing code?

#245

Post by sofa42 »

bdrool wrote: post #97
dasil003 wrote: post #91

Non-programmers make this mistake all the time: thinking that the syntax is the hard part of programming. No, the hard part of programming is understanding in very specific and rigid details how to accomplish a task. What the author doesn't realize is the enormous amount of processing power, shared culture and empathy that goes into human interaction. Even mighty Google doesn't have the compute power or the architect…

> Non-programmers make this mistake all the time: thinking that the syntax is the hard part of programming. Programmers make it all the time too, or at least something very similar. See all those people who are on the endless quest for the "perfect" language, which usually means one which allows for writing the shortest code, sometimes at a very high cognitive cost for very little payoff. No, I really don't want to d…

The language is the medium. I like writing code that I can look at and be happy, for no real reason. For traditional art, some prefer oils some prefer water-colors. It's the same for programmers. http://programmers.stackexchange.com/a/16164

Re: The future is fewer people writing code?

#246

Post by khedoros »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #229
khedoros wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> google isn't unaware, I'll try not to put words in his mouth, but a google exec said something along the lines that we aren't very far from needing half of the programmers/ IT people we have today In one way, that's a scary idea (a lot of people will end up looking for work elsewhere). On the other, what programmer wants to do the stuff that can be automated away or done by a non-programmer? Or wants to reinvent th…

> what programmer wants to [...] reinvent the wheel because of NIH syndrome? Almost all of them?

Hard to imagine, when I see all the stories about tiny modules in Node.js...but easy to imagine when I see how many JS frameworks are out there.

Still, so much of what we do these days is just tying together other people's libraries, connecting them together and maybe doing a bit of data conversion. My first step when I need to do something is to find out if someone else already wrote the software. Then I can just install+configure+move on to more interesting things.

Re: The future is fewer people writing code?

#247

Post by imgabe »

jrapdx3 wrote: post #224
imgabe wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blueprints/schematics are far, far superior at conveying the information they do compared to a written narrative. Given the ease of preparing written text compared to drawing schematics nobody would go to the trouble of doing so if that weren't the case.

An interesting angle on the topic comes from my father who at one time was a project manager and designer in the construction industry. In the days before computers he would painstakingly hand-draw the design that was reproduced as blueprints, that was the role of the "draftsman". But the drawing wasn't the source of stress, rather it was the project "specification" that he sweated. The issue was the spec was a legal…

I work in the same construction design industry. The drawings themselves are also contractually binding. Many smaller jobs forgo the written specifications altogether.

Re: The future is fewer people writing code?

#248

Post by imgabe »

jwatte wrote: post #212
imgabe wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blueprints/schematics are far, far superior at conveying the information they do compared to a written narrative. Given the ease of preparing written text compared to drawing schematics nobody would go to the trouble of doing so if that weren't the case.

Why do you think textbooks (and ancient works) are written in text, not comics?

Why do you think Euclid drew diagrams and didn't write everything out in text?

Re: The future is fewer people writing code?

#249

Post by imgabe »

humanrebar wrote: post #171
imgabe wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blueprints/schematics are far, far superior at conveying the information they do compared to a written narrative. Given the ease of preparing written text compared to drawing schematics nobody would go to the trouble of doing so if that weren't the case.

> Blueprints/schematics are far, far superior at conveying the information they do compared to a written narrative. Blueprints don't change as much as software does. It's not generally interesting to diff, fork, reformat, or patch a blueprint.

Hmm, I don't think you've ever worked on designing a building. Being able to diff two sets of plans would be hugely beneficial.

Re: The future is fewer people writing code?

#250

Post by imgabe »

crpatino wrote: post #193
imgabe wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blueprints/schematics are far, far superior at conveying the information they do compared to a written narrative. Given the ease of preparing written text compared to drawing schematics nobody would go to the trouble of doing so if that weren't the case.

If you had a blueprint of the whole of NewYork city, you surely would need some tool to abstract away the maze of individual lines and be able to refer-to/work-with concepts like "Central Park", "the Harlem", or "Brooklyn Bridge". It is not about how much more information can we convey, but how much less data must be expended to present a tractable model of reality to the human operator. Conveying more details is wor…

Of course, there's the ability to zoom and pan to get the appropriate level of detail. There's a reason Google Maps isn't a text adventure.
Post reply on HN