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

Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

mikehadlow.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 197 posts

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#91

Post by lloyd-christmas »

Alex3917 wrote: post #33
gabemart wrote: post #13

I feel like the discussion around this post will suffer from a lack of specificity over what a 'software developer' is. Someone who works primarily on small javascript web applications has a really different job from someone who works on a large application built on a LAMP stack, or someone who writes complex iOS applications, or someone designs self-driving car software for Google, or someone who works on embedded s…

> Each of these jobs probably have a particular set of paths that lead to them. I think the commonality is that at the minimum you need to be able to read English at a proficient level, which weeds out the vast majority of American adults.

While I hate to be THAT cynical... my father is a doctor, and they've had issues with patients not understanding their paperwork. They had done studies to figure out the median reading level of their patients. It turned out to be an 8th grade level, so they adapted their paperwork. The patients still didn't understand it. It turned out that they were capable of reading at an 8th grade level, but their reading COMPREHENSION level was that of a 6th grader.

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#92

Post by unimpressive »

geebee wrote: post #49
conductr wrote: post #11

I liken coding to playing a musical instrument. Some people are musically inclined, they can learn easily and fast and they tend to the best. But most people require some level of training complimented by the dedication of what amounts to mostly self-practice. So in a way, you're self taught. The vast majority of people are willing to buy an instrument, just to see if they are musically inclined, but when they find o…

Although I try to be careful with analogies, I do think this is an excellent one, largely because it can help explain why coding can be seen as simultaneously easy and extremely difficult. I remember reading an interview with Andre 3000 a while back about how he composed "Hey Ya!". It turned out (this is all from memory) that the reason he used the chord pattern he chose was because he was relatively new to the guita…

>This is insightful. I've been very ambivalent about it, because I am scared of what happens through regulatory capture. But at this point, I do sometimes wish there were an industry-wide, well recognized exam that covered the paces that you go through when you interview at google, amazon, and small companies that are copying them.

I'm just as worried about regulatory capture as you are, but it might be possible to create a de facto standard exam in this vein just by making a good one and then relying on its merit to make it well known. I mean, fizzbuzz has already reached this status as an easy flunk-out interview question and lots of people take it as a positive test of programming ability. (Which it obviously isn't.)

The basic problem with an 'open exam' in this vein is that it is very easy to copy the work of others. So whatever problems you pick need to be things that are objective enough to be verifiable that someone has solved them but general enough that it won't be something where we all need to worry about whether you pasted your solution in from someones blog.

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#93

Post by tsunamifury »

teach wrote: post #82
tsunamifury wrote: post #38

" The majority of the population can not learn to code at all, no matter how much training they receive." What an arrogant, false, and self-aggrandizing fiction. Stop over-valuing yourself -- coding isn't some ultra-difficult natural selection process equivalent to winning an NBA Championship. Designing complex services, scaling and maintaining them on a server stack is hard. Developing, training, and shipping a usef…

Coding is, in fact, quite hard. But that doesn't mean no one can learn it. Playing the saxophone is quite hard but a lot of students learn how every year, to varying degrees of skill.

You're right -- the finer point seems to be that coding is not a binary state. Its a lot of things along a spectrum and a lot of people make money at all points.

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#94

Post by sgeisenh »

Shank wrote: post #69

I'm currently in an undergraduate program for Computer Science at the University of Wyoming. At my level (third year Computer Science classes), I've had the following class composition: - 2 classes dedicated to learning C++ (COSC 1010 was skipped, but included here for numbers, and COSC 1020) - 2 classes dedicated to algorithms in C++ (COSC 2030, 3020) - 1 class dedicated to math (COSC 2300, discrete structures) - 1…

In my opinion, it is very easy to teach the basic principles of software development and design. Algorithmic thinking is much harder to teach. A CS background sets you up to contribute ideas and produce efficient solutions to challenging problems. A software development background sets you up to implement ideas and solve problems quickly.

Obviously these are generalizations, but that's what I have seen in my experience.

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#95

Post by sgeisenh »

Shank wrote: post #69

I'm currently in an undergraduate program for Computer Science at the University of Wyoming. At my level (third year Computer Science classes), I've had the following class composition: - 2 classes dedicated to learning C++ (COSC 1010 was skipped, but included here for numbers, and COSC 1020) - 2 classes dedicated to algorithms in C++ (COSC 2030, 3020) - 1 class dedicated to math (COSC 2300, discrete structures) - 1…

In my opinion, it is very easy to teach the basic principles of software development and design. Algorithmic thinking is much harder to teach. A CS background sets you up to contribute ideas and produce efficient solutions to challenging problems. A software development background sets you up to implement ideas and solve problems quickly.

Obviously these are generalizations, but that's what I have seen in my experience.

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#96

Post by teh_klev »

heydonovan wrote: post #83

I could not disagree more on the notion that software developers are looked down upon. In my experience, all those developers are treated as omnipotent. Having intelligence on another level. These are the people who wear hoodies in the elevators, and carry around a Macbook, while everyone else is forced to wear business attire (along with faces of misery and non-excitement). These developers are the people that creat…

> In my experience, all those developers are treated as omnipotent. Having intelligence on another level. These are the people who wear hoodies in the elevators, and carry around a Macbook, while everyone else is forced to wear business attire (along with faces of misery and non-excitement). These developers are the people that created Facebook, Twitter, Netflix, etc and are known to have lots of cash, but never flaunt it

Not being rude, but I'm trying hard to figure out if this comment is parody/sarcasm or if you genuinely believe this fantasy?

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#97

Post by lukaslalinsky »

vinceguidry wrote: post #42
acconrad wrote: post #17

Hard programming is harder than you think. Coding schools are mostly teaching CRUD web development and a watered-down version of data science aimed at business analysts, which isn't that hard. You're not going to get folks lining up to take an embedded systems, graphics, or compiler bootcamp.

Web development (it's more than just CRUD) is hard. Even with the best web development framework, the state of the art in tooling, you're looking at at least a year of focused study before really being able to take a job. It doesn't require hard math, but it's still hard in that the sheer number of languages, tools, best practices, technologies is daunting. And they keep changing. My father is an electrician, after l…

It's a different kind of hard. The kind of hard that can be learned if you keep doing it. Yes, there are many technologies involved, but most of them are pretty straight-forward and documented. There is also a huge number of 3rd party resources and tutorials. I'm not saying it's easy, but if you read for long enough, you can understand it.

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#98

Post by dikaiosune »

paulcole wrote: post #71
logicallee wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There's no way I could work as a professional software developer, I'll hire you.

Here's what made me say that (and it wasn't humblebragging): I've worked in a marketing role in a software company and realize that I don't have the understanding of how to contribute in a meaningful way to a team-based professional programming project. My workflow isn't ideal: bang my head against a wall, Google my way out, copy/paste/edit until things work, and move on. Because I'm generally on a mission to get som…

bang my head against a wall, Google my way out, copy/paste/edit until things work, and move on.

I guess I finally have to get started with my work day... ;)

Re: Learn to Code, It's Harder Than You Think

#100

Post by austenallred »

>All the evidence shows that programming requires a high level of aptitude that only a small percentage of the population possess.

>The current fad for short learn-to-code courses is selling people a lie and will do nothing to help the skills shortage for professional programmers.

Outside the obvious lack of definition as to what a "programmer" actually is, this is a non sequitur (the conclusion doe not follow). There's an assumption built in that those who do possess a high level of aptitude already have CS degrees or are self-taught because it comes to them naturally. What if there are people who possess that high level of aptitude and they want something to help them learn in a structured way?

Extrapolated, the author's argument could be seen as, "Sorry, there's no point in teaching programming, because everyone with the aptitude to program already knows how to program," and I think that is a recognizable falsehood, if only anecdotally.

In other words, even given the assumption that programming does require a higher aptitude than some subset of the population does possess, there is no surefire way to determine who that subset is based on credentialing.

Post reply on HN