Poor, Poor Child. You have no idea. • Hacker News Board

Re: Poor, Poor Child. You have no idea.

#21

Post by dusklight » Fri, Jan 15, 2010, 1:37 AM UTC

m0th87 wrote: post #10

shin_lao wrote: post #2

Well, I'm sorry to say I strongly disagree with the mathematics part. Basis in linera algebra are a definitive plus and helped me approach programming in a sensible way.

I think it really depends on what you want to make. How does math help you make a CRUD application, for example?

The thing is the answer is YES, but you won't even understand why unless you have the appropriate math knowledge.

There would be a lot less terrible code written out there if people had a better grasp of discrete math, knew how to make their O(n) analysis, knew how to create and implement provably correct algorithms, knew lambda calculus and e.t.c. and that's just for general programming. I would say a basic grasp of set theory and graph theory applies to almost everything too.

Re: Poor, Poor Child. You have no idea.

#22

Post by dandelany » Fri, Jan 15, 2010, 1:52 AM UTC

shin_lao wrote: post #2

Well, I'm sorry to say I strongly disagree with the mathematics part. Basis in linera algebra are a definitive plus and helped me approach programming in a sensible way.

"especially for a web developer" is the important part. As a fellow web developer, I agree. I'd certainly like to get into the mathier side of programming someday, but it's rarely necessary for my day-to-day operations.

Remember, he's writing a letter to his former self, so the advice applies more to his life than it does in general.

Re: Poor, Poor Child. You have no idea.

#23

Post by RyanMcGreal » Fri, Jan 15, 2010, 2:08 AM UTC

>As a linguistics major, you're no stranger to the idea that a person is only capable of having thoughts and ideas that can be expressed in their language

As a linguistics major, you have no excuse for not knowing that Sapir-Whorf is utterly discredited.

Re: Poor, Poor Child. You have no idea.

#24

Post by dmnd » Fri, Jan 15, 2010, 2:40 AM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #20

"As a linguistics major, you're no stranger to the idea that a person is only capable of having thoughts and ideas that can be expressed in their language, and there is no reason to expect programming languages to differ from spoken languages in this area." I thought this idea (the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis) had been discredited.

My hypothesis is that the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is much more applicable to programming than natural language.

edit: after I wrote this, I realised it's just a restatement of PG's Blub paradox.

Re: Poor, Poor Child. You have no idea.

#25

Post by sshumaker » Fri, Jan 15, 2010, 2:46 AM UTC

cellis wrote: post #18

sonofjanoh wrote: post #15

What about game programming? Nobody mentioned it. It's the ultimate test. Try to hack together a simple pool game. You'll be amazed of how much maths and physics go into a simple game that millions use and enjoy.

Not much math. Some simple physics like velocity and momentum transfer that you can learn in a tutorial (in a day). I think it is important to make the distinction between game development (lots of simple math and complex "pluggable" formulas) and game engine development (yes, you need to understand linear algebra,trig, and perhaps calculus).

No, game development includes 'game engine development' - the majority of companies write their own engine or have heavily modified a licensed engine. And you often need to understand quite a bit of math to use even off the shelf engines - to debug issues and to tweak stuff.

Perhaps you're referring to what industry folk call gameplay programming? There's a lot less hardcore math there - but you still typically need to understand basic physics, trig, interpolation, etc.

Re: Poor, Poor Child. You have no idea.

#26

Post by EricBurnett » Fri, Jan 15, 2010, 2:51 AM UTC

My first experiences with programming must have been very different than his, with respect to the first section in particular. I always knew that programming was supposed to be hard - I grew up knowing no programmers, teaching myself the esoteric art of C++ from a copy of "Sams Teach Yourself Visual C++ 6 in 21 Days". So when I understood it reasonably well, I felt I must be above average. Indeed, I've never felt the feelings of "frustration and discomfort" he references. Instead, I have always had to battle with my hubris in thinking that I'm that much better than the programmers around me.

Re: Poor, Poor Child. You have no idea.

#27

Post by scott_s » Fri, Jan 15, 2010, 3:04 AM UTC

RyanMcGreal wrote: post #23

>As a linguistics major, you're no stranger to the idea that a person is only capable of having thoughts and ideas that can be expressed in their language As a linguistics major, you have no excuse for not knowing that Sapir-Whorf is utterly discredited.

Replying to your post in the recent discussion, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1033741, I don't understand your reasoning. Sure, you can extend a language introduce a concept. But the lack of that concept can still have molded speakers' thinking.

Re: Poor, Poor Child. You have no idea.

#28

Post by NathanKP » Fri, Jan 15, 2010, 3:24 AM UTC

Has anyone else checked out the main page of the site?

http://bryanwoods4e.com/

Be sure to view the HTML code to see the "hail satan" comment. This guy has some personality thats for sure....

Another of his sites linked from the main page:

http://www.howtousetwitterformarketingandpr.com/

Re: Poor, Poor Child. You have no idea.

#29

Post by zck » Fri, Jan 15, 2010, 3:34 AM UTC

bryanwoods wrote: post #6

J3L2404 wrote: post #4

In the beginning of Hillegass's book, Cocoa Programming for Mac OS X, he has a great quote of someone from Caltech being asked about the real world usefulness of a degree in astrophysics. His response was "Not much, but if I run into a hard problem and start thinking I must be stupid because I can't figure this out, then I remember I have a degree in astrophysics so I am not stupid and this must be hard. So in that w…

Thanks for mentioning this. I've actually been working through that book over the past few days and think that anecdote really got under my skin. For some reason it didn't dawn on me when writing the article. I'll make note of it.

pg made a similar comment in Undergraduation (http://www.paulgraham.com/college.html):

> My mother, who has the same [thermostat], diligently spent a day reading the user's manual to learn how to operate hers. She assumed the problem was with her. But I can think to myself "If someone with a PhD in computer science can't understand this thermostat, it must be badly designed."

Re: Poor, Poor Child. You have no idea.

#30

Post by jimbokun » Fri, Jan 15, 2010, 3:36 AM UTC

kristiandupont wrote: post #3

While there are clearly differences between languages, I think it is rather deterministic to put that much weight on the first language? My first language was GW Basic. By your logic, there wouldn't be much hope for me I guess..

I think it's much more important what you choose as a second language. If it is significantly different from the first language in adding new concepts and ways thinking about programming, there is a good chance that between the two of them learning any other new programming language as needed won't seem as daunting. And you will have a wide range of techniques at your disposal regardless of which language you happening to be using in a given project.