4 ms·

Full agree; especially on comp-sci being far harder of a science than economics. The author seems to be making the opposite case, for example based on how there

Full agree; especially on comp-sci being far harder of a science than economics. The author seems to be making the opposite case, for example based on how there are not labeled 'schools of through'. I would argue these schools of thought are good for structuring debate but don't make economics into a science. Furthermore, it's very easy to dispel the author's idea that 'learning to code' is not a worthwhile goal or even that there's serious risk if the public confuses learning to code with computer science. To give a correlary, if you teach someone to weld no one will confuse them with a master metallurgist and machinist. I think the world will understand the difference between a novice programmer and a master programmer. The risk here is low. And thus the rant is not terribly valuable.

alosarv 11y ago
I think that assumption is incorrect. Looking at the multitude of posts on "why can't programmers program"[1] (in the sense of not having solid fundamentals) and the difficulty of finding, let alone having an interview process that is reliable able to identify them, I would say there is a large amount of confusion distinguishing those who can weld and master metallurgists. People can spend a decade or more in the industry as working "programmers" and fail at writing FizzBuzz, let alone understanding basic relational theory or how a their chosen stack works. And then we try to patch it over with more tooling or new languages that are supposed to be less error-prone or somehow magically allow us to build out programming teams out of coders rather than teach them solid CS fundamentals and sound development practices. The problem is that to someone not trained in a craft, even a beginner would appear to be able to perform that craft; only someone with deep(er) understanding of metallurgy would be able to recognize that said welder has no idea of what they're doing and is just following a set scripted actions; what's more harmful is that said beginner is lulled into believing they are actually an expert whereas they're really an Expert Beginner[2]. [1] http://blog.codinghorror.com/why-cant-programmers-program/ http://blog.codinghorror.com/why-cant-programmers-program/ [2] http://www.daedtech.com/how-developers-stop-learning-rise-of-the-expert-beginner http://www.daedtech.com/how-developers-stop-learning-rise-of...

alosarv 11y ago

I think that assumption is incorrect. Looking at the multitude of posts on "why can't programmers program"[1] (in the sense of not having solid fundamentals) and the difficulty of finding, let alone having an interview process that is reliable able to identify them, I would say there is a large amount of confusion distinguishing those who can weld and master metallurgists. People can spend a decade or more in the industry as working "programmers" and fail at writing FizzBuzz, let alone understanding basic relational theory or how a their chosen stack works. And then we try to patch it over with more tooling or new languages that are supposed to be less error-prone or somehow magically allow us to build out programming teams out of coders rather than teach them solid CS fundamentals and sound development practices. The problem is that to someone not trained in a craft, even a beginner would appear to be able to perform that craft; only someone with deep(er) understanding of metallurgy would be able to recognize that said welder has no idea of what they're doing and is just following a set scripted actions; what's more harmful is that said beginner is lulled into believing they are actually an expert whereas they're really an Expert Beginner[2]. [1] http://blog.codinghorror.com/why-cant-programmers-program/ http://blog.codinghorror.com/why-cant-programmers-program/ [2] http://www.daedtech.com/how-developers-stop-learning-rise-of-the-expert-beginner http://www.daedtech.com/how-developers-stop-learning-rise-of...