51–60 of 99 posts
Programming is always a tradeoff between ability and knowledge of the programmer, time he can invest, performance the product must deliver and the unpredictable future of the product. Nothing can be perfect because nothing is perfect.
Generally speaking, complexity of a software system is inversely proportional to the collective skill and experience the development team.
If I want quality products or services, in any field, I shouldn't expect to get it from the lowest-cost option.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is vague and insulting. Good. It should be. Get mad about that. Get so mad that you devote time and effort to fixing it. Programming compared to other disciplines is what might arise from a Lord of the Flies situation. Like the end of that novel, we should stop, fall at the feet of a comparison of programming to other disciplinnes, and weep tears of shame.
> Get so mad that you devote time and effort to fixing it. Interestingly, I feel that insulting people is one of the worst possible ways to get them to change their behaviour.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is vague and insulting. Good. It should be. Get mad about that. Get so mad that you devote time and effort to fixing it. Programming compared to other disciplines is what might arise from a Lord of the Flies situation. Like the end of that novel, we should stop, fall at the feet of a comparison of programming to other disciplinnes, and weep tears of shame.
The easiest fix is to debunk the article. Which reflects the author not spending enough time writing kidding critical software and too much with cool startup kids. There is no technical solution to a social problem caused by hiring cheap young and naive programmers.
Obviously I am exaggerating but it's still a huge part of reality.
> What reason is there to believe we can improve programming technology to be vastly easier and more accessible? To start with, spreadsheets. So many failed efforts to make programming vastly easier and more accessible have started with almost this exact line. I think it's possible that there is a seductive trap there. We see spreadsheets and we think, “programming that doesn't have the downsides we associate with sp…
> Unfortunately application programming got trampled in the internet gold rush. No, it didn't I think if you don't rely on memory but examine the history as Jonathan Edwards has done, you would be surprised to find that the late 1990's was, indeed, a big cliff in terms of application development innovation. You can argue the reasons -- maybe it's not about the internet gold rush -- but you would have to do a small fr…
Maybe developing web application is harder now (and i may disagree, react and node are really an improvement compared to 2013 SenchaJS imho). Also, CMS now exist for minimal programming.
But you're looking application-wise, not tooling-wise:
- Javascript is safer and easier to use with the last ES iteration (ore maybe it's just me, but my last pet project was really easy to complete with the new javascript).
- OpenBLAS now exist, and libraries were written around this fantastic piece of software. Compare a jupyter notebook to matlab, and appreciate how easy it is to do math on a computer now (and i had to use matlab in college for my math bachelor degree, so i KNOW it is less complex for young mathematicians right now)
- I've wrote stuff in C89 (gcc option, for school related work). Then i was allowed so use C99 (still for school). C99 was easier to write and to optimize. Also, my current collegues were using C in the early 90s, and for them debugging was a pain, while to me, C is one of the easiest language to debug thank to gdb (using the TUI or not).
- Sytem building automatisation is easier (not painless yet, but easier). You can argue it's more complex, but automated stuff i always more complex than manual (but faster too). And in the 90s, system automation was Perl job. I like Perl, but let's agree ansible is less complex.
- System monitoring is easier now too.
And i'm a relatively young programmer, with 2 languages i'm comfortable using for professional work (3 with bash, 4 with ansible, if it count). I'm pretty sure experienced programmers who can use other stuff than C and python have plenty of other experiences. Also, consider compiling your own kernel, writing your own filesystem and/or paquet manager. Would you rather do it in 2018 or in the early 00's? It is a second year project in my school. Second year. It use to be a master degree assessment in college.
Tools are easier to use, and information easier to get.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is vague and insulting. Good. It should be. Get mad about that. Get so mad that you devote time and effort to fixing it. Programming compared to other disciplines is what might arise from a Lord of the Flies situation. Like the end of that novel, we should stop, fall at the feet of a comparison of programming to other disciplinnes, and weep tears of shame.
The easiest fix is to debunk the article. Which reflects the author not spending enough time writing kidding critical software and too much with cool startup kids. There is no technical solution to a social problem caused by hiring cheap young and naive programmers.
The article stands true on its own, and is not a simple indictment of a class of programmers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is vague and insulting. Good. It should be. Get mad about that. Get so mad that you devote time and effort to fixing it. Programming compared to other disciplines is what might arise from a Lord of the Flies situation. Like the end of that novel, we should stop, fall at the feet of a comparison of programming to other disciplinnes, and weep tears of shame.
> Get so mad that you devote time and effort to fixing it. Interestingly, I feel that insulting people is one of the worst possible ways to get them to change their behaviour.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Get so mad that you devote time and effort to fixing it. Interestingly, I feel that insulting people is one of the worst possible ways to get them to change their behaviour.
He's not actively insulting anyone; he's calling a spade a spade, he's telling the truth, and if you find that insulting then change that reality.
It's hard, I know. But all I'd do when someone refers to Rubik's Cubes and DnD is shrug it off and think it doesn't apply to me.
Lemme use an analogy: Why is building a house not accessible to all? Surely house building could be more like building with legos. Building a proper house is so much more that just piling rocks mixed with mortar. You have to take into account the ground composition, moisture, light, ventilation, red tape, usability, safety, etc. In other words: it takes a huge set of skill. You can use advanced tools, like a tractor…
Sure it might need some training, but it should be the kind that can be explained in a DIY TV show.
Lemme use an analogy: Why is building a house not accessible to all? Surely house building could be more like building with legos. Building a proper house is so much more that just piling rocks mixed with mortar. You have to take into account the ground composition, moisture, light, ventilation, red tape, usability, safety, etc. In other words: it takes a huge set of skill. You can use advanced tools, like a tractor…
Saying, we can't make it simpler is a cop-out. It used to be simpler. The question isn't whether we can do better (we know we can) but how to find the will, effort and funding to accomplish it.