3 ms·

"hey, we've made the instruction codes shorter and an IDE that can navigate to line numbers". That's almost what happened with C. In general I agree with your

"hey, we've made the instruction codes shorter and an IDE that can navigate to line numbers". That's almost what happened with C. In general I agree with your point though. "As it has always been in the history of programming, what it takes for this potential to come true is for the current generation of programmers to retire, leaving room for fresh paradigms." Not so sure about this. I see more of a trend to repeat previous errors because the industry as a whole quickly forgets lessons.

oblio 8y ago
Does it truly forget? A lot of the past knowledge is locked away or it was only experienced by 1000 programmers back in the 70s. It stands to reason that the huge amounts of programmers today have to learn their own lessons. I think maybe in 2050 or so we will reach software development maturity, once the base of experienced developers is not dwarfed by the generation of developers joining the work force in one single year. Keep in mind that the number of programmers is not only increasing moderately in developed countries, but much more so in developing countries, where hundreds of millions of people are joining the global middle class.
- valw 8y ago
  A lot of past knowledge is also very available and mostly ignored. Even the most popular books about programming are read only by a tiny minority of programmers. Listening to our elders is simply not part of the current programming culture.
  - maxxxxx 8y ago
    I always think that a lot of the young guys who are struggling with C would actually read K&R instead of random blogs they would quickly have a solid understanding. Most of today's books are really bad in comparison. Too long, no depth. On the other hand the cool thing about programming is that you can get started and be productive without almost no knowledge of theory. Compare that to physics or math where anything interesting requires years of prior training. I hope we'll find some balance where we don't lose the ability to get started quickly but still respect and study older achievements.
valw 8y ago
> Not so sure about this. I see more of a trend to repeat previous errors because the industry as a whole quickly forgets lessons. It is a necessary condition, certainly not a sufficient one

oblio 8y ago

Does it truly forget? A lot of the past knowledge is locked away or it was only experienced by 1000 programmers back in the 70s. It stands to reason that the huge amounts of programmers today have to learn their own lessons. I think maybe in 2050 or so we will reach software development maturity, once the base of experienced developers is not dwarfed by the generation of developers joining the work force in one single year. Keep in mind that the number of programmers is not only increasing moderately in developed countries, but much more so in developing countries, where hundreds of millions of people are joining the global middle class.

valw 8y ago
A lot of past knowledge is also very available and mostly ignored. Even the most popular books about programming are read only by a tiny minority of programmers. Listening to our elders is simply not part of the current programming culture.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  I always think that a lot of the young guys who are struggling with C would actually read K&R instead of random blogs they would quickly have a solid understanding. Most of today's books are really bad in comparison. Too long, no depth. On the other hand the cool thing about programming is that you can get started and be productive without almost no knowledge of theory. Compare that to physics or math where anything interesting requires years of prior training. I hope we'll find some balance where we don't lose the ability to get started quickly but still respect and study older achievements.

valw 8y ago

> Not so sure about this. I see more of a trend to repeat previous errors because the industry as a whole quickly forgets lessons. It is a necessary condition, certainly not a sufficient one