5 ms·

The nature of programming has changed so much since then. Back then, you could get going by knowing a very limited set of building blocks (BASIC keywords, all d

The nature of programming has changed so much since then. Back then, you could get going by knowing a very limited set of building blocks (BASIC keywords, all described in a single manual). The challenge was to build something meaningful out of those building blocks. Programming could be hard, but never too complex. Problem solving at its purest. That's what got me hooked! Today, the set of building blocks is unlimited. The challenge is to find the right building block for what you want to do, using the infinity of resources available to you (all the APIs, libraries, Google, GitHub, StackOverflow, blog posts). You're drowning in complexity, even if what you want to program is straightforward. And you are constantly mindful of writing idiomatic code, always wondering if there's a better way to do the same thing, which is normally a good thing but can be time-consuming and getting in the way of the fun part that is the problem solving.

eesmith 8y ago
"Back then" means programming as a kid, on a hobbyist's microcomputer, yes? I'm a bit confused because you compare that experience to modern programming as a software developer. I think you are thinking of the difference across 40+ years, rather than the difference of kid vs. adult. I mean, if you were programming on a Unix machine in 1983, or a VMS machine, or an IBM mainframe, you would have far more than a single manual.
- esfandia 8y ago
  You're right, I guess I'm comparing against both those axes at the same time, since I'm relating to my own experience as a kid 30 years ago vs as someone working in tech today. Indeed, that's not really a fair comparison. The point I was trying to make was about the distinction between programming with a limited set of building blocks vs programming with a large and open-ended selection of libraries. They don't require the same skill set, and one seems more fun to me than the other.
  - eesmith 8y ago
    It is easy to get started with Lego, and fun to use. Those who are really good can build some impressive objects. The limitations of the parts make it easy to find challenges to overcome. Mechanical engineering is a lot harder, there are so many options to consider, new options come along all the time so you're always falling behind, and cost plays a much larger and - I think - more boring role in the process. I think that is analogous to the point you are making with computers.
    - esfandia 8y ago
      Exactly.

eesmith 8y ago

"Back then" means programming as a kid, on a hobbyist's microcomputer, yes? I'm a bit confused because you compare that experience to modern programming as a software developer. I think you are thinking of the difference across 40+ years, rather than the difference of kid vs. adult. I mean, if you were programming on a Unix machine in 1983, or a VMS machine, or an IBM mainframe, you would have far more than a single manual.

esfandia 8y ago
You're right, I guess I'm comparing against both those axes at the same time, since I'm relating to my own experience as a kid 30 years ago vs as someone working in tech today. Indeed, that's not really a fair comparison. The point I was trying to make was about the distinction between programming with a limited set of building blocks vs programming with a large and open-ended selection of libraries. They don't require the same skill set, and one seems more fun to me than the other.
- eesmith 8y ago
  It is easy to get started with Lego, and fun to use. Those who are really good can build some impressive objects. The limitations of the parts make it easy to find challenges to overcome. Mechanical engineering is a lot harder, there are so many options to consider, new options come along all the time so you're always falling behind, and cost plays a much larger and - I think - more boring role in the process. I think that is analogous to the point you are making with computers.
  - esfandia 8y ago
    Exactly.