Comment by apantel
12 days ago
Seeing all this stuff I can’t help but think that if programming doesn’t just come naturally to your brain such that you would need all this stuff, then you’re probably better off pursuing something that does come naturally.
I had a similar reaction. Also it looks like a lot of the advice pertains to software development rather than programming (e.g. variable/method naming, onboarding newcomers...).
Has anyone here used flashcards to help them learn a new language?
This books isn't about that at all. It's more about how our brains work and how we can use it to make our code better (read: easier to understand).
If anything, the book tells the exact opposite: you can write your code so that it's naturally easier to understand.
I agree, but I think a more important distinction is that while 90% (wild guess) of people could get it via pure System 2 thinking (perhaps via an unpleasant grind of working through it slowly), only a small percentage can think this way intuitively and quickly in System 1.
I think there's value in having non-programmers (or experts of any kind) having worked through some non-trivial examples as it may solidify in their mind that what the experts are telling them is legitimate (though, this rests on the requirement that what they are telling people actually is legitimate...which I think is is very much the same problem, but more refined). A classic example of this is COVID, but not only the vaccines aspect.
I think this general idea (a much more sophisticated interpretation of it than I'm giving here) has very broad applicability and importance to advanced societies.
not so sure i agree here unfortunately. i think even if something doesn’t come naturally, if you have passion for it and put in work, then you can learn to think in that way. everything takes practice to get good at and although some things may come naturally, at a certain point hard work beats out raw talent
That's assuming that while the passionate untalented person has been working hard at it, the talented person has just been sitting on their laurels, which doesn't really match my experience. People who are naturally good at an activity tend to perform that activity more, since people tend to enjoy succeeding.
An untalented programmer who has worked their way to competency would probably make a good teacher, because they can impart all the things that didn't work for them, but they're unlikely to be as good as a talented programmer, given equal cumulative hours of practice for each one.
Not always. Lot of smart people realize hard work beats talent.
1 reply →
You need both discipline and the "stuff" that you're referring to.
The vast majority of the programming workforce doesn't have both.
If you can only pick one, you're better off with the discipline, because you will earn more money and be able to retire earlier, and/or with better living standards.
I'm not really sure where i stand on this - as someone in the throws of self teaching programming (C) - and consider myself pretty smart. I've attempted learning on my own several times. Many times since 2016 and have given up on many occasions. CS50x is one of the first pieces of material which has close to what i consider sane pedagogy.
I go back and forth between thinking Python is better for learning because "hey, less typing, less curly braces". Then thinking - great i dont know wtf is happening here - just magic i guess?? (refer XCXD comic).
I have seen this many times in relation to education and quite simply, the way we teach, often "for speed", and "at university" - do not equate to learning anything. Learning how things works for real - takes time, and is often outside the scope of a "semester"...and quite honestly beyond our current paradigms of cordoned off disciplines.
Programming/algorithmic thinking is more or less hardware accelerated mathematics. When i opened up Hammack's - How to Prove it - and read about sets, saw the notation - AHA moment. Similar things happened when looking at Charles Petzold's Code and seeing details of carry bits in counter chips, and comparing those to literal carry pins in gear based mechanical calculators (in Norman Bigg's "Quite Right").
None of this comes naturally (to me) - and i think many of the learning resources are there - but are not there at the time you need them. Common comments "just do a project"..."get out of tutorial hell"...very well meaning...but even a 1000 LOC text editor is an absolute head fuck for someone who just learnt to print a triangle of hashes.
I've reached out to the creator of the Turing Complete PC game on Steam. I'm certain once virtualising a computer which runs C in that game - will we reach the epitome of programming pedagogy :-)