5 ms·
I am surprised the author call himself a "programmer" and judge that "... Many programmers have no real substance in their work - the job is trivial ...". On wh
by touristtam 12y ago
I am surprised the author call himself a "programmer" and judge that "... Many programmers have no real substance in their work - the job is trivial ...". On what is based such judgment? Personal experience? Then it is totally biased.
He is also saying that "A scientist has his science to worry about ..." which is quite a demeaning of the job that a programmer has to go through in comparison: The programmer has to understand his field AND the domain: the scientist's field. Sure it might 'only' be to get the knowledge from the scientist. But doing away with software abstraction for the sake of writing simple (simplistic) code is hiding the fact that if the code is to be worked on in the future, it will be a giant spaghetti monster.
The author might as well write VB macros in MS Excel. :p
- _yosefk 12y agoYet in reality, I work on chip architecture and hardware accelerators and have never written VB macros in MS Excel. Go figure. (I did write one VB macro in VS 6 though, I think. Perhaps it was that incident that distorted my worldview.)
- touristtam 12y agoSorry if my previous comment seemed a bit harsh, I guess your blog post was bound to take some flak after such an opinionated view of the programmers in your field (and the perceived generalization to the programmers outside this field). That being said, you are possibly touching at a subject more fundamental regarding the human behavior, were some of us are perfectly happy not learning as much as we can and just going by our daily job. ;)