4 ms·

I actually think the article has some value (rubber ducking is good :), but continuing the parent's line of criticism: "Now step through the code using a debugg

by ds9 13y ago

I actually think the article has some value (rubber ducking is good :), but continuing the parent's line of criticism: "Now step through the code using a debugger". That's all he says about that! Even for experienced developers, and depending on the language, editor and other factors, installing and configuring a debugger is often non-trivial. In fact setting up a working environment is a whole other adventure for a newbie, and a different set of knowledge and skills than programming. Yet this author merely recommends the debugger without giving clues. Of course he can't give directions for every situation, but recognizing the big leap in the advice would be more considerate of the intended audience.

brudgers 13y ago
Rubber Ducking is good for someone who writes code all day all year. It's something a person can do if they aren't struggling with syntax and logic and EMACS shortcuts while under a short deadline while having no team for support. I suspect most students wind up at StackOverflow via websearch. Their background is writing text messages and formulating good questions conforming to StackOverflow's style guide is a skill unto itself. Most programming education is sink or swim. It doesn't start with writing tests and specs - let alone learning to use a debugger (call stacks are part of data structures and algorithms courses not introductory programming classes). The people who have more of it right than anyone are the PLT group. Their curriculum is not designed to weed out the weak. It optimizes on preventing false negatives rather than false positives. It's not as if there is a scarcity of computational resources any more. Likewise, it's not like StackOverflow will run through its supply of webpages unless students are actively discouraged and abused. It is only because a focus on preventing false positives ego strokes those who have been identified as positive, that the practice sees so much love at StackOverflow. There's a back button on the browser for anyone who doesn't like helping students with homework. The site would be better if using it was the preferred behaviour.
stonemetal 13y ago
Your average CS computer lab is Windows or OSX with an IDE already installed, use the debugger is asking them to click a button not install GDB from source.

by ds9 13y ago

brudgers 13y ago

Rubber Ducking is good for someone who writes code all day all year. It's something a person can do if they aren't struggling with syntax and logic and EMACS shortcuts while under a short deadline while having no team for support. I suspect most students wind up at StackOverflow via websearch. Their background is writing text messages and formulating good questions conforming to StackOverflow's style guide is a skill unto itself. Most programming education is sink or swim. It doesn't start with writing tests and specs - let alone learning to use a debugger (call stacks are part of data structures and algorithms courses not introductory programming classes). The people who have more of it right than anyone are the PLT group. Their curriculum is not designed to weed out the weak. It optimizes on preventing false negatives rather than false positives. It's not as if there is a scarcity of computational resources any more. Likewise, it's not like StackOverflow will run through its supply of webpages unless students are actively discouraged and abused. It is only because a focus on preventing false positives ego strokes those who have been identified as positive, that the practice sees so much love at StackOverflow. There's a back button on the browser for anyone who doesn't like helping students with homework. The site would be better if using it was the preferred behaviour.

stonemetal 13y ago

Your average CS computer lab is Windows or OSX with an IDE already installed, use the debugger is asking them to click a button not install GDB from source.