4 ms·

You're absolutely right but most developers will also have a hard time moving between language families. For example a self-taught developer may have gone thoug

You're absolutely right but most developers will also have a hard time moving between language families. For example a self-taught developer may have gone though javascript, python, java, go, and swift... but then get punched in the face by Lisp or Haskell. The reason I single out self-taught developers is that many CS paths will push though a broad degree of language, or at least interpreters and compilers, such that its less of a hill to climb. I am a self-taught developer with this problem. But I still enjoy diving head first into new languages. It just takes awhile.

exdsq 5y ago
I’m self taught, have written some compilers, and have written Haskell in production. I’ve also done the better half of SICP so a bit of Lisp there too. The only way to learn a new family of languages is by writing code - I’ve not found any prior knowledge that’s really helped me go from Python to Haskell or whatever, except the general skill of writing software.
moltke 5y ago
I taught myself java, go, and Scheme. Functional programming is still pretty popular among autodidacts last time I checked, mare than in formal environments I'd argue.
yakubin 5y ago
In my experience, people who were taught programming in uni are the ones who know fewer languages. I suspect it's due to the amount of money Microsoft put (still puts?) into making sure that C# is popular in that space. I studied maths, but informatics was in the same department and there was a lot of stuff funded by Microsoft and everyone around was programming in C#. Another popular university nearby produced mostly Java devs, judging from the people I got to know on the job coming from there. My university also had some courses with Smalltalk, OCaml etc., but these courses were not obligatory, and more geared towards people who are actively interested in programming languages. Self-taught programmers on the other hand more often have the intrinsic curiosity and motivation to learn those topics. Also diving deep into topics is their strength, since the uni counterparts often know the names of concepts, but after a while it's quite clear that this knowledge of names is rarely coupled with familiarity with the topics they represent. I'm sure just knowing the names of things gets you far when you want to pass an exam, but for actual work it's scarcely different from knowing nothing at all. As Feynman said, there's a big difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something. Now, those are just generalizations from experience. I've also met plenty of counterexamples in both groups.

exdsq 5y ago

I’m self taught, have written some compilers, and have written Haskell in production. I’ve also done the better half of SICP so a bit of Lisp there too. The only way to learn a new family of languages is by writing code - I’ve not found any prior knowledge that’s really helped me go from Python to Haskell or whatever, except the general skill of writing software.

moltke 5y ago

I taught myself java, go, and Scheme. Functional programming is still pretty popular among autodidacts last time I checked, mare than in formal environments I'd argue.

yakubin 5y ago

In my experience, people who were taught programming in uni are the ones who know fewer languages. I suspect it's due to the amount of money Microsoft put (still puts?) into making sure that C# is popular in that space. I studied maths, but informatics was in the same department and there was a lot of stuff funded by Microsoft and everyone around was programming in C#. Another popular university nearby produced mostly Java devs, judging from the people I got to know on the job coming from there. My university also had some courses with Smalltalk, OCaml etc., but these courses were not obligatory, and more geared towards people who are actively interested in programming languages. Self-taught programmers on the other hand more often have the intrinsic curiosity and motivation to learn those topics. Also diving deep into topics is their strength, since the uni counterparts often know the names of concepts, but after a while it's quite clear that this knowledge of names is rarely coupled with familiarity with the topics they represent. I'm sure just knowing the names of things gets you far when you want to pass an exam, but for actual work it's scarcely different from knowing nothing at all. As Feynman said, there's a big difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something. Now, those are just generalizations from experience. I've also met plenty of counterexamples in both groups.