3 ms·

Something about this bothers me. Let's say Donald Knuth hasn't coded in a year, maybe's he's been busy with this and that ... You consider him not a programmer

Something about this bothers me. Let's say Donald Knuth hasn't coded in a year, maybe's he's been busy with this and that ... You consider him not a programmer ... maybe that is too obvious and example but also design patterns ... I have hard time accepting that as well ... I would agree there is something anti-intellectual in being dogmatic against learning them ... but I suppose on some level it depends on what you mean. This can be a contentious topic; are you saying that if you are not friar in the mission of the Gang of Four that you are not a programmer?

randomapathy 13y ago
In my attempt at brevity I fear I lost some context. I do however firmly stand by if you are not actively coding, you are not a programmer. What the exact timeline is, I will gladly leave up for debate, but it's not like riding a bicycle - you lose ability over time. As for design patterns, I think we are in agreement (at least in principle) about their worth as a starting point. I am not at all saying that GoF (or any other design pattern text) should be followed. Rather, that anyone seriously considering themselves a programmer should have an understanding of the design patterns that are pertinent to their language/methodology, and hopefully their own opinions on which make sense or not. I likely have too high of a standard for the term programmer, but feel it has been steadily lowered by this type of talk and wanted to at least try to move the bar back up.
- vacri 13y ago
  but it's not like riding a bicycle Interesting tidbit on this concept. When I was 17 I had a cycling accident where I flew over a car and landed on my hip quite badly. I gave up the bike for ten years (wasn't a huge fan anyway), then eventually thought I better get a bike again. So after not riding for ten years, I had a bike out on a test ride in a side street, and on that first-ride-in-ten-years, I was riding quite happily hands-free. There really is something to not forgetting how to balance on a bike. I decided not to push my luck and resumed a normal pose before I reached the speed bump though...

randomapathy 13y ago

In my attempt at brevity I fear I lost some context. I do however firmly stand by if you are not actively coding, you are not a programmer. What the exact timeline is, I will gladly leave up for debate, but it's not like riding a bicycle - you lose ability over time. As for design patterns, I think we are in agreement (at least in principle) about their worth as a starting point. I am not at all saying that GoF (or any other design pattern text) should be followed. Rather, that anyone seriously considering themselves a programmer should have an understanding of the design patterns that are pertinent to their language/methodology, and hopefully their own opinions on which make sense or not. I likely have too high of a standard for the term programmer, but feel it has been steadily lowered by this type of talk and wanted to at least try to move the bar back up.

vacri 13y ago
but it's not like riding a bicycle Interesting tidbit on this concept. When I was 17 I had a cycling accident where I flew over a car and landed on my hip quite badly. I gave up the bike for ten years (wasn't a huge fan anyway), then eventually thought I better get a bike again. So after not riding for ten years, I had a bike out on a test ride in a side street, and on that first-ride-in-ten-years, I was riding quite happily hands-free. There really is something to not forgetting how to balance on a bike. I decided not to push my luck and resumed a normal pose before I reached the speed bump though...