3 ms·

I'm sorry but it's bullshit. I taught myself programming with BASIC when I was a kid, my first programs were horrible, unstructured things with GOTOs everywhere

I'm sorry but it's bullshit. I taught myself programming with BASIC when I was a kid, my first programs were horrible, unstructured things with GOTOs everywhere and redundant code and yet I was able to teach myself Scheme as well a few years later. In fact, I find that I understand the point behind useful programming language constructs (and, yes, their beauty) after spending some time suffering due to the lack of them.

tx 19y ago
You have a lot to prove. A giant as big as Dijkstra was, he publicly said that "corentin has mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration" and you're out to prove him wrong. Good luck. :-) Makes me feel more lucky for starting with x86 assembly although I am not sure it's any better than BASIC. God bless us!
- gruseom 19y ago
  I don't think Dijkstra's absolutisms have aged particularly well. On some things he turned out completely right, on other things staggeringly wrong. In this article, look at his endorsement of the idea that coding should be left to the final 25% of a project's schedule. It's all very hit and miss, yet he delivers every claim in the same godlike tone of infallibility. The idea that maybe everything hasn't been figured out about software development - that in fact, maybe not very much has been - seems alien to him.
  - tx 19y ago
    Dijkstra could not predict that in 2007 to-do lists and message boards like Facebook will become multi-billion dollar businesses. Sorry to poop on your beliefs, but "agile" BS can be applied only on CRUD projects that have nothing in common with Computer Science.
    - deleted 19y ago
      [deleted]
- noonespecial 19y ago
  It was just a conjecture of his that history didn't bear out. Thinking in basic is bad. Great leaps in programming and the availablity of knowlege about programming (other people's good code) made it easy to stop thinking in basic if one was motivated. Great men once thought that the earth was flat and there were only 4 elements. It is trivial today for even a nitwit to prove otherwise. This does not mean that these great men are now less great or that nitwits are now smarter.
- michaelneale 19y ago
  Miranda was my first language. Did me a fat lot of good ;)
- ericb 19y ago
  Giants routinely get things wrong. It's called an argument from authority. The consequences of accepting arguments from authority because of their authority can be damaging and wasteful--read about Linus Pauling and Vitamin C, for example. So I would say he has no more to prove than otherwise.

tx 19y ago

You have a lot to prove. A giant as big as Dijkstra was, he publicly said that "corentin has mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration" and you're out to prove him wrong. Good luck. :-) Makes me feel more lucky for starting with x86 assembly although I am not sure it's any better than BASIC. God bless us!

gruseom 19y ago
I don't think Dijkstra's absolutisms have aged particularly well. On some things he turned out completely right, on other things staggeringly wrong. In this article, look at his endorsement of the idea that coding should be left to the final 25% of a project's schedule. It's all very hit and miss, yet he delivers every claim in the same godlike tone of infallibility. The idea that maybe everything hasn't been figured out about software development - that in fact, maybe not very much has been - seems alien to him.
- tx 19y ago
  Dijkstra could not predict that in 2007 to-do lists and message boards like Facebook will become multi-billion dollar businesses. Sorry to poop on your beliefs, but "agile" BS can be applied only on CRUD projects that have nothing in common with Computer Science.
  - deleted 19y ago
    [deleted]
noonespecial 19y ago
It was just a conjecture of his that history didn't bear out. Thinking in basic is bad. Great leaps in programming and the availablity of knowlege about programming (other people's good code) made it easy to stop thinking in basic if one was motivated. Great men once thought that the earth was flat and there were only 4 elements. It is trivial today for even a nitwit to prove otherwise. This does not mean that these great men are now less great or that nitwits are now smarter.
michaelneale 19y ago
Miranda was my first language. Did me a fat lot of good ;)
ericb 19y ago
Giants routinely get things wrong. It's called an argument from authority. The consequences of accepting arguments from authority because of their authority can be damaging and wasteful--read about Linus Pauling and Vitamin C, for example. So I would say he has no more to prove than otherwise.