5 ms·

So since my early days I've been doing multiple languages, started in Java at school then picked up JavaScript and Ruby pretty quickly, as well as being a bash

by hpoe 5y ago

So since my early days I've been doing multiple languages, started in Java at school then picked up JavaScript and Ruby pretty quickly, as well as being a bash Unix cli afficiando, since then my list of languages numbers in the double digits. One of the things I am always astounded by is developers that only know one language, having multiple languages has changed the way I understand programming in general. At that point when I approach a problem I start by reasoning what the appropriate paradiagm or approach is to solve the problem and then decide the language from that. At this point when I see requirements that list X years in specific language I am confused as to why people don't just want programmers since languages seem so easy to pickup. Their is a dark side to this I will admit though I do struggle a little bit more approaching a new language and then trying to find ways around concepts that I feel should be there, or I struggle sometimes to deal with language specific details.

Scarbutt 5y ago
since languages seem so easy to pickup. What takes time is being productive with the APIs and ecosystem, not learning the language.
- fouric 5y ago
  Or learning the underlying programming paradigm. Even if Haskell used a Python-like syntax, I bet people would still find it 90% as hard to learn as they do now, due to the killer combination of lazy evaluation and purely-functional design.
  - JoelMcCracken 5y ago
    Yep. People often point at syntax and say "yuk!" but the problem is really not groking semantics. Syntax is just easy to bikeshed.
    - fouric 5y ago
      Thank you for clarifying my point, and attaching precise terminology to it! Come to think of it, that's probably why people mistakenly think that Lisps are so hard. The syntax is scary, and easy to bikeshed - even though most of their semantics (for CL and Scheme, at least) are really easy, and very similar to Python.
- travisgriggs 5y ago
  +1000
- Qem 5y ago
  I agree. For example, while easy to learn, Python is pretty hard to truly master, due to the huge library. I guess going the polyglot route depends on how much time you can spend programming. If it's a full time job, it pays. If you can devote at most 1-2 hours a day, like me, it's probably better to focus in one or two at most, otherwise you will never grok any of them.

by hpoe 5y ago

Scarbutt 5y ago

since languages seem so easy to pickup. What takes time is being productive with the APIs and ecosystem, not learning the language.

fouric 5y ago
Or learning the underlying programming paradigm. Even if Haskell used a Python-like syntax, I bet people would still find it 90% as hard to learn as they do now, due to the killer combination of lazy evaluation and purely-functional design.
- JoelMcCracken 5y ago
  Yep. People often point at syntax and say "yuk!" but the problem is really not groking semantics. Syntax is just easy to bikeshed.
  - fouric 5y ago
    Thank you for clarifying my point, and attaching precise terminology to it! Come to think of it, that's probably why people mistakenly think that Lisps are so hard. The syntax is scary, and easy to bikeshed - even though most of their semantics (for CL and Scheme, at least) are really easy, and very similar to Python.
travisgriggs 5y ago
+1000
Qem 5y ago
I agree. For example, while easy to learn, Python is pretty hard to truly master, due to the huge library. I guess going the polyglot route depends on how much time you can spend programming. If it's a full time job, it pays. If you can devote at most 1-2 hours a day, like me, it's probably better to focus in one or two at most, otherwise you will never grok any of them.