Live data from Hacker News

Programming and Writing

antirez.com

41–50 of 87 posts

Re: Programming and Writing

#41
post #32

While I think there's some truth to this, the author has it backwards in some kind of way. Or rather: The author misses an important epistemologic nuance. > One year ago I paused my programming life and started writing a novel, with the illusion that my new activity was deeply different than the previous one. What's implied here is the hope for a new experience. But this can never be achieved: A programmer can never…

>The author experiences writing as very similar to programming precisely because they are a programmer. Sure. But the veracity of the comparison doesn't depend on the prerequisites to make the comparison.

How can there be a comparison without the prerequisites?

The words don't carry any meaning without context.

You could say "the veracity does not depend on the prerequisites" to mean "whoever enters the context will agree to the comparison".

Re: Programming and Writing

#42
On writing.

> I believe programming, in this regard, can learn something from writing: when writing the first core of a new system, when the original creator is still alone, isolated, able to do anything, she should pretend that this first core is her only bullet.

@antirez: why `she` and not `they`? I know you are not a native English speaker (so am I), but I believe that's not the case here and was likely written so intentionally.

Re: Programming and Writing

#44
post #30

As someone who has done both extensively, I humbly disagree. Writing involves thinking in a much less instrumental way, in my experience. In programming, there is often a clear pre-defined task, and the only question concerns the proper means of achieving that task. Writing, on the other hand, necessarily compels something much more dynamic & non-linear at the level of composition. I'd toss this one under the categor…

Computer programs can often be structured in nearly infinite ways while accomplishing the same (or nearly the same) objective. Writing can often be organized and worded in nearly infinite ways while getting across the (or nearly the same) message. There are some pretty strong similarities. Writer's block and programmer's block correlate. EDIT: Sadly, writing has no compiler to tell me that I overlooked the word "bloc…

Sure, the goal of writing a piece of software is to have a piece of software, and the goal of writing a novel is to have a novel. That's trivial, though.

When I write a piece of software, I have more concrete goals that just write a piece of software. I'll usually have a goal (a TODO app), and maybe some ideas about which features. Sure, I might not know exactly how I'll get there, and along the way I might come up with the new ideas, but you don't start with the goal of writing a TODO app and end up with an application that processes DICOM images.

With writing a novel, well, very often the writer has no idea where it will go. This varies--some authors spend a lot of time planning everything out, scene by scene, chapter by chapter. But a lot of authors discovery write. That's what I do.. When I write, I'm waiting, hoping, to surprise myself. I want to go---oh what the hell is that!?

When programming, I go, Oh, I need to do that, to get this working. While writing, I'm constantly feeling my way through each word. I re-read it, outloud, tasting each word, and constantly asking myself: how does it make me feel?

Re: Programming and Writing

#45

On writing. > I believe programming, in this regard, can learn something from writing: when writing the first core of a new system, when the original creator is still alone, isolated, able to do anything, she should pretend that this first core is her only bullet. @antirez: why `she` and not `they`? I know you are not a native English speaker (so am I), but I believe that's not the case here and was likely written so…

It is just one of the choices for more inclusive and less standard language.

Re: Programming and Writing

#46

On writing. > I believe programming, in this regard, can learn something from writing: when writing the first core of a new system, when the original creator is still alone, isolated, able to do anything, she should pretend that this first core is her only bullet. @antirez: why `she` and not `they`? I know you are not a native English speaker (so am I), but I believe that's not the case here and was likely written so…

One solution people have come up with for the perceived unfairness of male pronouns doing double-duty as neuter pronouns in English is to sometimes use female ones instead.

The down side of this is that it leaves us with three possible neuter pronoun sets, at least two of which are just about guaranteed to bother someone. Using exclusively male pronouns will obviously bother some people, now, else this wouldn't be an issue in the first place. Using female ones will bother some people (either for ideological reasons or, for those who grew up on "male is what you use for the general case", by tripping them up as they try to figure out who in particular is being referred to). "They" and such are safer but you still get the occasional (incorrect) pedant complaining about that usage.

Re: Programming and Writing

#47
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The author experiences writing as very similar to programming precisely because they are a programmer. Sure. But the veracity of the comparison doesn't depend on the prerequisites to make the comparison.

How can there be a comparison without the prerequisites? The words don't carry any meaning without context. You could say "the veracity does not depend on the prerequisites" to mean "whoever enters the context will agree to the comparison".

Look, I have two objects in a locked room. They are in fact very similar objects. They have the same weight, same visual presentations, same physical composition, up to reasonable limits of measurement. In short they are very similar objects. Your approach says, the object is only similar iff someone has the key to the room and observes the two objects. Sure, the only way to tell that they are similar is to for someone or something to make the observation. But its quite something different to say that they are similar only because someone observed the two objects. Maybe that's true, but that's a pretty wild claim.

Re: Programming and Writing

#48
I remember Brandon Sanderson also outlined that these jobs are similar, and explicitly mentioned that usually it is difficult to do them at the same time. Both programming and writing activate the same thought routines and therefore do not feel like one of them helps you rest from the other.

Re: Programming and Writing

#49

On writing. > I believe programming, in this regard, can learn something from writing: when writing the first core of a new system, when the original creator is still alone, isolated, able to do anything, she should pretend that this first core is her only bullet. @antirez: why `she` and not `they`? I know you are not a native English speaker (so am I), but I believe that's not the case here and was likely written so…

One solution people have come up with for the perceived unfairness of male pronouns doing double-duty as neuter pronouns in English is to sometimes use female ones instead. The down side of this is that it leaves us with three possible neuter pronoun sets, at least two of which are just about guaranteed to bother someone. Using exclusively male pronouns will obviously bother some people, now, else this wouldn't be an…

Thanks for the explanation. I'm not a gender pronouns pedant in any way, my question was asked purely from an educational perspective.

My native language is Russian, which is generally a gendered (masculine/feminine/neuter) language. Nouns have gender. It mostly follows the spelling of the words - i.e. if a word ends with a certain vowel. Sometimes it doesn't work that way, mostly with loanwords. In other cases the historical form of the word did match a pattern, and was assigned a gender accordingly - and then changed (e.g. by re-loaning it in a more accurate spelling), and no longer fits. When that happens, people will use the more "appropriate" rather than the "right" gender in colloquial speech, and eventually it becomes the new standard, collecting the mismatch.

A good example of this is the Russian word "coffee". When it was first loaned back in 18th century, it was "kofiy" - and in Russian, that is definitely masculine. Eventually it got re-loaned as "kofe", which would normally be neuter; but the masculine gender assignment stayed from past spelling. In the dictionaries, that is - in practice treating the word as neuter became one of the common incorrect colloquialisms, just because it doesn't "look" masculine. Language purists fought this for several decades, and eventually lost: it's still nominally masculine, but neuter is considered an "accepted variant" in modern dictionaries.

So to a Russian speaker, say, New York and Texas are masculine, while California and Florida are feminine. So, when I read "she" in @antirez's article, I was immediately confused, like, did I miss a character introduced in the previous paragraph or ...who is _she_?

In my writings, instead of saying "he", "she", "they", I try to call people by the exact meaning of what I'm writing about, eg engineer, manager, programmer, etc. No idea why it's not THE way to end all the pronouns dilemmas in English.

Re: Programming and Writing

#50
post #4

The greatest commonality between writing and programming is that in those statements something happens where that something is a series of actions in furtherance of a common goal, a plot. Achieving such often requires refactoring and simplification. The work evolves towards a clarity that is polished only in hindsight and not immediately clear from the cover or readme.md file. It is pretty easy to see how poor or gra…

On "refactoring" in novels: On many occasions I've heard an author say something like "I got half-way through the book and I found out that one of the characters didn't want to do the thing I'd planned for them, so I had to deal with the plot changing in this unexpected way." I've only once heard an author say "so I had to go back and rewrite the character until they were the sort of person that did want to do the th…

While this is (probably obviously!) very subjective from author to author, I think "the character didn't want to do the thing I'd planned for them" is a good thing story-wise, because it means you really understand your character. The flip side of that, though, is "the character didn't want to do the thing" isn't necessarily a sign that the character shouldn't do the thing. In general, your protagonist is going to have to be pushed out of their comfort zone during a story, and they are not going to like it. Frodo did not start out The Lord of the Rings thinking "throwing this ring into a volcano in Mordor sounds like a lovely few weeks' vacation."
Post reply on HN