4 ms·
Your criticism of the specific details rings true, but I also liked the overall thrust of the GP which is that two common failure modes for working software eng
by dasil003 1y ago
Your criticism of the specific details rings true, but I also liked the overall thrust of the GP which is that two common failure modes for working software engineers are either being overly academic and not efficient at practical application of that knowledge, or else being too superficial and direct about solving the immediate problem in front of them without recognizing or even being aware of the theoretical knowledge and concepts that can greatly improve their local solutions.
I think it’s fair to say those failure modes tend to disproportionately accumulate university graduates and self taught developers respectively. As long as we don’t use it as some kind of litmus test then I don’t think it hurts to call that out.
- lapcat 1y agoI acknowledge that theory-oriented vs. problem-oriented would be a fair characterization. But I think the language of "comfort zones" and "pushing through" was unfortunate and unfair. It suggests that somehow self-taught developers are lazy, when in fact they often have to work harder than anyone else, because nothing is handed to them by a professor or university. (Not to mention that it can be a lot harder to get a job when you don't have any academic credentials.) I would say that teaching yourself a difficult, esoteric skill, with no outside help, is inherently breaking out of your comfort zone.