“Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.” • Hacker News Board

Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”

#91

Post by xyzzy_plugh » Sat, Dec 04, 2021, 7:02 PM UTC

reikonomusha wrote: post #41

ncann wrote: post #14

That first reply is so funny to me because it hits too close to home https://twitter.com/nice_byte/status/1466940940229046273 The more I do this, the more I gravitate towards the simple things.

Despite being a joke, I know it's the "Ha Ha Only Serious" [0] sort. I can't help but think this is severely biased by the trends of "enterprise software," where you eventually "give up", and clock your 9–5 writing if+for making a fine living, but erroneously pass that off as a mature, Jedi-like way of thinking about programming, like the meme suggests. (And, consequently, you spend no less time debugging hairy, nest…

> you eventually "give up", and clock your 9–5 writing if+for making a fine living, but erroneously pass that off as a mature

This comment sure indicates to me where you most likely are on the curve.

In all seriousness, I think this is considerably off the mark. After enough experience you realize that expressivity and convenience are antipatterns and don't actually simplify things but are harbingers of complexity, bugs, tech debt, even the downfall of organizations and products.

Saying it is all ifs and for-loops is completely true. Everything else, all the abstractions and high level features, are just sugar.

I try to keep a healthy and balanced diet, myself.

> industry is slow to assimilate most state-of-the-art ideas, sometimes by as much as 40 years.

Most of those ideas are terrible. The industry is so incredibly young and has experienced so much change over those 40 years that I have a hard time accepting the notion that the industry is slow to adopt. The reason the old building blocks are still popular is because they are a thin abstraction over how computers work, and ultimately that is at the root of everything we do.

Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”

#92

Post by throwaway984393 » Sat, Dec 04, 2021, 7:03 PM UTC

disambiguation wrote: post #32

also "coding is basically over glorified plumbing". ~ my cynical coworkers

and ops is custodial engineering for software. we mop up what leaks out after the plumbers are done

Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”

#93

Post by tromp » Sat, Dec 04, 2021, 7:03 PM UTC

qsort wrote: post #28

MaulingMonkey wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All you really need is `mov`. https://github.com/xoreaxeaxeax/movfuscator https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7EEoWg6Ekk

SUBLEQ :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-instruction_set_computer

λx. x S K

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatory_logic#One-point_ba...

Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”

#94

Post by karmakaze » Sat, Dec 04, 2021, 7:06 PM UTC

The way I interpret this is that the 'just ifs and for loops' is like Matrix rain code. In the beginning it looks like gibberish scrolling down the screen. When you master it, it's still gibberish scrolling down the screen, but it's simultaneously something else on another level as well.

I often find myself writing simple things with a compact-but-high-level-conceptualization, that when edited by someone else, clearly only saw the rain.

Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”

#95

Post by reikonomusha » Sat, Dec 04, 2021, 7:06 PM UTC

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #91

reikonomusha wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite being a joke, I know it's the "Ha Ha Only Serious" [0] sort. I can't help but think this is severely biased by the trends of "enterprise software," where you eventually "give up", and clock your 9–5 writing if+for making a fine living, but erroneously pass that off as a mature, Jedi-like way of thinking about programming, like the meme suggests. (And, consequently, you spend no less time debugging hairy, nest…

> you eventually "give up", and clock your 9–5 writing if+for making a fine living, but erroneously pass that off as a mature This comment sure indicates to me where you most likely are on the curve. In all seriousness, I think this is considerably off the mark. After enough experience you realize that expressivity and convenience are antipatterns and don't actually simplify things but are harbingers of complexity, b…

Really, there are no if+for, just compare and jump. Why don't we use what the metal uses, instead of these "expressive abstractions"?

If+for have no deeper foundational significance in the construction of programs or computations, literally, than say a lambda function. But because the latter is unfamiliar, it's spoken about in the same manner you present: as if it is some highly abstract, complicating, high-level feature (when truly that take is just baloney).

Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”

#96

Post by nestorD » Sat, Dec 04, 2021, 7:07 PM UTC

And datastructures.

Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”

#97

Post by jareklupinski » Sat, Dec 04, 2021, 7:09 PM UTC

gdulli wrote: post #88

ncann wrote: post #14

That first reply is so funny to me because it hits too close to home https://twitter.com/nice_byte/status/1466940940229046273 The more I do this, the more I gravitate towards the simple things.

I'd never seen that meme before, but there's a Bruce Lee quote (maybe apocryphal) that has had a lot of meaning for me ever since I got over the same hump myself. “Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch, and a kick, just a kick. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick, no longer a kick. Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick.”

makes me think of the Buddhist "Before enlightenment: chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment: chop wood, carry water".

not my favorite source since it doesn't go into the 'scaling the mountain' bit, but every source that talks abt that part seems to be...eh: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/15921/what-is-t...

Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”

#98

Post by mandeepj » Sat, Dec 04, 2021, 7:10 PM UTC

“coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”

Maybe, he knows only that much, yet

Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”

#99

Post by notacoward » Sat, Dec 04, 2021, 7:11 PM UTC

Until you get to network programming, then it's "just open a socket"

Re: “Coding is basically just ifs and for loops.”

#100

Post by mbot5324 » Sat, Dec 04, 2021, 7:12 PM UTC

reikonomusha wrote: post #95

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you eventually "give up", and clock your 9–5 writing if+for making a fine living, but erroneously pass that off as a mature This comment sure indicates to me where you most likely are on the curve. In all seriousness, I think this is considerably off the mark. After enough experience you realize that expressivity and convenience are antipatterns and don't actually simplify things but are harbingers of complexity, b…

Really, there are no if+for, just compare and jump. Why don't we use what the metal uses, instead of these "expressive abstractions"? If+for have no deeper foundational significance in the construction of programs or computations, literally, than say a lambda function. But because the latter is unfamiliar, it's spoken about in the same manner you present: as if it is some highly abstract, complicating, high-level fea…

> as if it is some highly abstract, complicating, high-level feature

But symbol calculus is a highly abstract, complicating, high-level system assembled out more reality-based systems beneath it. If it seems simple to you, you're just under the curse of knowledge.