Please don't learn to code
171–180 of 273 posts
Re: Please don't learn to code
#172This largely misses the point. I agree that it's not "essential" and not everyone should do it, but it's still more valuable than I think Attwood gives credit for. I'm perhaps in a unique position to comment, having recently taught my girlfriend to program. So I can talk about how that played out. My girlfriend understands menus, she knows about links, she can install software, she can use word, she can type away lik…
Well spoken, but not all people are like your girlfriend. To most people, learning a bit about programming would primarily be an exercise in frustration.
Those people who just generally don't like learning anything would likely be frustrated by learning about programming, but I've no idea if this amounts to most people or not.
Re: Please don't learn to code
#173Whats more important is that the computer stops becoming a black box for the average user. They should be taught the basics when it comes to how it works. It would not only help make it easier for the average person to use, it would help with security as well. If we teach basic programming skills to make that happen then I'm all for it. Coding is not the important part, understanding the machine is.
Re: Please don't learn to code
#174Best part: he works at a technology company, with a technical staff. That makes millions and millions of dollars a year.
I appreciate Jeff's sentiment, but he's missing the huge swath of people that could benefit from just a little (admittedly not great and half broken) programming knowledge.
Re: Please don't learn to code
#175I really, really disagree with Jeff Atwood here. Jeff has interpreted "learn to code" with "become a programmer". They're not the same thing. I don't think that is what this meme is about at all. Programming is logical thinking in practise. Programming is breaking a problem set down, thinking step by step through it, thinking of edge cases, and making it work. There is nothing wrong with Jeff's BASIC example, if that…
I don't understand the distinction you raise in the first paragraph. Coding is programming. Just because everyone can divide doesn't mean everyone is trying to be a mathematician, but I think everyone should (at least have the opportunity to) learn long division. Programming may not be the fourth "R", but maybe "Research" is!
Scripting basically takes the problem and a language and directly transforms the problem into a working program. You don't need fancy algorithms, you don't need fancy background knowledge in programming topics, you need python, a python dictionary and directory access (for example). Or Excel and VB and a few arrays and a formula.
On the other hand, heavier programming would require more and more thought when actually implementing a solution to a problem. Efficiency might become a large concern earlier, you might need more complicated algorithms sooner and so on. Think about every occasion where you transformed a problem into a graph problem and applied some graph search, or graph coloring to this problem.
If I understand "coding" as "scripting" and "programming beyond coding" as "programming", the distinction makes sense, and it makes sense to call for more people with the ability to script simple things, because scripting is not too hard and saves a lot of time.
Re: Please don't learn to code
#176Re: Please don't learn to code
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are right there are probably a hundred people on here able to provide a working MVP alongside you and do it faster, cleaner and pick up on solutions you cant possibly know yet. Be a domain expert. But learn to code anyway :-)
I'm sure anyone here could do that. But how many people here are looking for a non technical co-founder? Coders are solving their own problems, and until I can hack together a prototype I don't think I'll be able to draw any attention from real programmers.
Re: Please don't learn to code
#178How much time would people save in aggregate if they knew a little bit about the tools they use? The average person shouldn't need to know about recursion, but why not a for-loop.
Re: Please don't learn to code
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a great example. My brother in law is a chef. I asked for his scone recipe, and he said to throw in some sugar, flour and milk (or something like that, I'm not a chef). Mix it until it looks right. That's expertise. I'm a lousy cook - but I can cook food if I follow instructions that have accurate measurements. That doesn't mean I shouldn't learn to cook.
You're not a lousy cook, you're just not used to the process. All it is is following instructions with precise measurements, and then doing it over and over again with different instruction sets until you start to recognize patterns and you find yourself having to look at the instructions less and less. That's 99% of cooking.
For most people, they are just going to follow a recipe and you are right, that is all they need. But to be on a professional level and to be able to reproduce those flavors it takes a lot more than that. Check out the book "Professional Baking", it shows a lot of the complex nature that goes into being a pro.
Re: Please don't learn to code
#180i'm surprised that people are arguing with this kind of questions here, totally a waste of time, gosh.