How I became a better programmer (2017)
jlongster.com
How I became a better programmer (2017)
1–10 of 150 posts
Re: How I became a better programmer (2017)
#2Discussed at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13918888
Re: How I became a better programmer (2017)
#3The points on the fluff in particular resonate with me because idespite being a fairly good software engineer, I would say it was only recently I truly started seeing past the fluff.
However, typing this out, I realise I would have said the same thing 10 years ago, and 5 years ago, and I probably will again another 5 years from now.
I think the truth is that we're always missing the forest for all the trees -- only at increasing levels of abstraction: at first, everything is foreign, then syntax becomes fluff, then APIs become fluff, then patterns, then languages, then compilers, then ... I look forward to learning what the next level of fluff will be.
> The majority of the stuff being released every day is just a rehash of the same ideas. Truly revolutionary stuff only happens every few years.
Maybe not even that often. I can recommend Old Is the New New by Kevlin Henney for a good, historical perspective on how little actually changes sometimes: https://youtube.com/watch?v=AbgsfeGvg3E
Edit: now this was more interesting than I anticipated. What is the next level of fluff? Concurrency? Advanced data structures? Phrasing problems for SMT solvers? Probabilistic modeling?
Or are the things I picture as fluff just specific techniques, because the next level of fluff is so meta I wouldn't even recognise it now?
Re: How I became a better programmer (2017)
#4The points on the fluff in particular resonate with me because idespite being a fairly good software engineer, I would say it was only recently I truly started seeing past the fluff. However, typing this out, I realise I would have said the same thing 10 years ago, and 5 years ago, and I probably will again another 5 years from now. I think the truth is that we're always missing the forest for all the trees -- only a…
> then languages
Perhaps a slight digression, but: I think there are very few people who can really say they can 'see through' the difference between languages.
C++, Erlang, Prolog, and Haskell, are very different languages, all the way from the shallow matter of syntax, through the type system, and even down to the fundamental model of computation. When I hear someone say If you learn to program in one language, it's easy to learn another, I assume that person doesn't know much about programming.
Re: How I became a better programmer (2017)
#5I've heard so many things about Clojure. I am a CS student with some experience in the most used languages (JS, java, python). Can someone explain in simple cs terms why Clojure is sooo hyped? What can I do with this language that would be harder with other languages? From what I've gathered it's used in data wrangling and manipulation in general but most data-oriented tools are written in Python.
Re: How I became a better programmer (2017)
#6The points on the fluff in particular resonate with me because idespite being a fairly good software engineer, I would say it was only recently I truly started seeing past the fluff. However, typing this out, I realise I would have said the same thing 10 years ago, and 5 years ago, and I probably will again another 5 years from now. I think the truth is that we're always missing the forest for all the trees -- only a…
Not sure how to write this. I am hoping the next level of fluff to be removed will be implementing concrete algorithms in procedural or functional style in day to day coding. Instead we should be leveraging other programs (such as SMT solvers, but not limited to those) to produce a suitable implementations of solutions.
That is, we should try to focus more on specifications, in one form or another.
So much of the software I work with could plausibly have been written by a machine instead.
Re: How I became a better programmer (2017)
#7The points on the fluff in particular resonate with me because idespite being a fairly good software engineer, I would say it was only recently I truly started seeing past the fluff. However, typing this out, I realise I would have said the same thing 10 years ago, and 5 years ago, and I probably will again another 5 years from now. I think the truth is that we're always missing the forest for all the trees -- only a…
> then languages Perhaps a slight digression, but: I think there are very few people who can really say they can 'see through' the difference between languages. C++, Erlang, Prolog, and Haskell, are very different languages, all the way from the shallow matter of syntax, through the type system, and even down to the fundamental model of computation. When I hear someone say If you learn to program in one language, it'…
Or they program different things than you do. In data science for example it's not a big deal to jump across Matlab, Python, Julia, Lua etc.
If you know Java, you'll not take very long to be productive in another JVM language or in C#.
Yes, deep specialized expertise will take time. Also, switching across paradigms or levels (C -> Prolog or Python -> assembly) will take much longer. But that's not what people usually have in mind when they say switching languages is easy. It's usually the domain that takes longer to learn.
Re: How I became a better programmer (2017)
#8The points on the fluff in particular resonate with me because idespite being a fairly good software engineer, I would say it was only recently I truly started seeing past the fluff. However, typing this out, I realise I would have said the same thing 10 years ago, and 5 years ago, and I probably will again another 5 years from now. I think the truth is that we're always missing the forest for all the trees -- only a…
> then languages Perhaps a slight digression, but: I think there are very few people who can really say they can 'see through' the difference between languages. C++, Erlang, Prolog, and Haskell, are very different languages, all the way from the shallow matter of syntax, through the type system, and even down to the fundamental model of computation. When I hear someone say If you learn to program in one language, it'…
I'm one of those people, but there's more nuance than that to it. I've learned about 20 different languages to some degree, from Python to brainfuck to Elixir currently. When I learn a new language, I go to the source material, so for elixir I used the tutorials at the elixir home page and their API documentation. I read the tutorials, writing each line of code into my editor, running each, modifying it to see how it works, etc. Then, everytime the tutorial links to or mentions an API, I'll go read that documentation page in full and experimenting. Then I'll make some projects with that language, look at how the more experienced Elixir (or whatever) developers code by exploring their repos, etc.
After doing that 10+ times, it becomes easier to see the patterns in languages, and easier to understand how their underlying structure will affect how you have to code. There's only so many ways to write a compiler or interpreter, and if you know how they work and you know that your language is, for example, optimized for tail recursion, then you get your experience from other similar languages as a bonus.
I see your point if you're saying, on a surface level, that, "you know one, you know them all," is wrong, but if you dig deeper I think you'll see that, for the experienced (as in: someone who's been around a while) developer, you kinda can say that, with some reservations.
I think anyone can do the same thing, it just takes a decade or more to get there. I'm kinda dumb, too, so if I can do it, anyone can.
Re: How I became a better programmer (2017)
#9The points on the fluff in particular resonate with me because idespite being a fairly good software engineer, I would say it was only recently I truly started seeing past the fluff. However, typing this out, I realise I would have said the same thing 10 years ago, and 5 years ago, and I probably will again another 5 years from now. I think the truth is that we're always missing the forest for all the trees -- only a…
> then languages Perhaps a slight digression, but: I think there are very few people who can really say they can 'see through' the difference between languages. C++, Erlang, Prolog, and Haskell, are very different languages, all the way from the shallow matter of syntax, through the type system, and even down to the fundamental model of computation. When I hear someone say If you learn to program in one language, it'…
Well, as someone who has taught different languages as first, second and third languages to students and young pupils I would say it becomes easier. Not easy in an absolute sense. It still requires effort.
I would however agree with you that those who say "it's easy to learn another" in an absolute way has usually only considered languages from the same group so far.
Re: How I became a better programmer (2017)
#10How I became a bitter programmer. (1995-2020)