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

We are done with “Hacking”

cacm.acm.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 98 posts

Re: We are done with “Hacking”

#41

Post by paulie_a »

calahad wrote: post #31

"Programmers do not need to write much code anymore; all they need to do in most cases is wire together already available components." As a general statement, I feel like this is objectively false. Just look at how much code gets added to Github daily.

I'll take it a step further, the author is an idiot. I am a huge proponent of using existing libraries and plugins but it actually takes real code to make it function. Again this person is an idiot and clearly shouldn't be writing code or articles.

Re: We are done with “Hacking”

#42

Post by craigsmansion »

> Edsger W. Dijkstra's words [..] grow increasingly more valuable every year.

Using a Dijkstra quote in an article where sentences such as "The profession now requires less mathematics and algorithms and instead emphasizes more skills under the umbrella term `sociotech.' are used.

I wonder what Prof. Dijkstra would have to say about this "sociotech" umbrella. Actually I don't, because that's the value of having an understanding of a subject matter deeper than an Internet search and a copy and paste: it prevents one from throwing quotes and invented words around that sound good, but ultimately mean nothing useful.

> It seems that the future of programming rests less in math and more in sociotech relationships between people.

Or: it seems that the future of making your fortune with software rests less in math and more in marketing.

True though it may be, I don't know how this relates to the discipline of computer programming.

Re: We are done with “Hacking”

#43

Post by wellpast »

meesterdude wrote: post #38
wellpast wrote: post #15

> Programmers have to know how to write maintainable code... He implies that this somehow falls into “socitech” ability, which it is not. Maintainable code is precise, well-factored code — almost pedantic — which requires an orthogonal (if not counterpointed) talent to the more “social” talents. I would go further to say that a mathematical understanding or at least inclination is required to write maintainable code.…

> I would go further to say that a mathematical understanding or at least inclination is required to write maintainable code. Maintainable code is more an act of writing than of mathematics.

And (good) writing is more an act of mathematics than what most people would construe.

Re: We are done with “Hacking”

#44

Post by some_account »

meesterdude wrote: post #38
wellpast wrote: post #15

> Programmers have to know how to write maintainable code... He implies that this somehow falls into “socitech” ability, which it is not. Maintainable code is precise, well-factored code — almost pedantic — which requires an orthogonal (if not counterpointed) talent to the more “social” talents. I would go further to say that a mathematical understanding or at least inclination is required to write maintainable code.…

> I would go further to say that a mathematical understanding or at least inclination is required to write maintainable code. Maintainable code is more an act of writing than of mathematics.

I think mathematical people tend to think that code that looks like math is clean code.

Since it's similar to math, it's as clear as it can be. Like functional programming - the cleanest code is one line of code which expresses the intent as an mathematical function.

Re: We are done with “Hacking”

#45

Post by wilsonnb3 »

bor0 wrote: post #14

> Programmers do not need to write much code anymore; all they need to do in most cases is wire together already available components. As if this stops you from re-inventing the wheel in attempt to understand more. Understanding things is what distinguishes programmers. I had exactly the same discussion with one of my friends that wants to become a programmer. His argument was that programming is not fun at all becau…

I agree with your friend, for the most part.

Most days I feel more like a combination of a preschool teacher and a switchboard operator than a computer scientist.

I'm not really sure how your first paragraph is a counter-argument to your friend. Reinventing the wheel to learn is just busywork. Reinventing the wheel because you need the wheel and don't have one available is fun.

Unfortunately the wheel is always available now.

Re: We are done with “Hacking”

#47

Post by afandian »

Long shot, as this is a CACM article. Does anyone in Oxford UK want a 2ft foot worth of paper CACM editions from 2012 to 2015 in Oxford UK? I have been avoiding throwing them out but now getting round to it. Let me know.

Re: We are done with “Hacking”

#48

Post by wilsonnb3 »

paulpauper wrote: post #34
little_goat_boy wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever employeed a programmer, or worked as one? Stack overflow is a valuable resource. I'd be pissed if my boss told me not to use it.

I have done both. It's valuable if you are a novice and need help creating a loop or an event or something like that. If I'm paying then I'm assuming you know how to do those things. Would google hire a coder who uses Stack Overflow instead of knowing how to code without it? I cannot imagine a JavaScript coder who works for Google needing Stack Overflow for JavaScript problems.

It's unreasonable to expect people to retain knowledge of every little corner of a programming language when there's an easily available reference they could use instead.

"How often they need to refer to reference material" is a pretty terrible metric for measuring the abilities of a programmer.

Re: We are done with “Hacking”

#49

Post by cjhanks »

paulpauper wrote: post #17

They have to know how to get help outside of an office or even a project team when working remotely and alone. Aside from Stack Overflow, which dominates the Q&A platform for programming market, there are documentation and code repositories that a professional programmer must know how to navigate. Those who previously only relied on colleagues and friends will now lose to those who know how to learn from the entire I…

It's a shame you were so downvoted. I can call several occasions watching 90% of the software developers walk out of the office if the internet went down. Many of whom had jobs not involved with maintaining or developing remote hardware.

I have also seen entire teams that would not really notice if the internet was working.

Stack Overflow has a place in productive development, but I agree - people should be able to function without it.

Re: We are done with “Hacking”

#50

Post by needlepont »

calahad wrote: post #31

"Programmers do not need to write much code anymore; all they need to do in most cases is wire together already available components." As a general statement, I feel like this is objectively false. Just look at how much code gets added to Github daily.

How much of that (Github) code is based on du jour languages and only a casual attempt (if any) to reuse or adapt an existing codebase? I'd say at least 40% but I may be pessimistic.
Post reply on HN