News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Outgrowing Software. Parent comment

Re:Outgrowing Software by fauigerzigerk on Sunday March 21, 2021 @08:38AM (#26529968)
The important difference between programming and reading/writing is that written language is just another representation of natural language. All the complexity is in understanding and using natural language. Reading itself is trivial once you have some practice.

Programming on the other hand is creating new abstractions (i.e modelling). It never becomes trivial, because it's not just a new encoding of existing abstractions.

I think programming is no different than maths. Yes, everyone will have to know a little bit of it, but very few will be capable of modelling complex problems or implementing large software systems.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Outgrowing Software by jart on Sunday March 21, 2021 @11:02AM (#26530959)
Well lots of people can read and write, but few people are able to write a good novel. Everyone I know who isn't necessarily a software engineer but has basic programming skills has benefited from that knowledge. For example with everyday office work there's a big difference between someone who's able to use Word and someone who's able to use Access. The latter requires programming know-how. Also shell scripts and automation. It has a huge productivity amplifying impact.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Outgrowing Software by fauigerzigerk on Sunday March 21, 2021 @12:17PM (#26531486)
>Well lots of people can read and write, but few people are able to write a good novel.

That's exactly my point. Coming up with a great story is very difficult. Writing it down is trivial in comparison.

>Everyone I know who isn't necessarily a software engineer but has basic programming skills has benefited from that knowledge.

I completely agree. It's very useful and should be taught in school just like maths is taught in school. Maybe it should be taught as part of maths.

My point is that the cognitive difficulty of formal modelling is on a completely different level than that of transcribing words. We should adjust our expectations accordingly.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Outgrowing Software by jart on Sunday March 21, 2021 @01:41PM (#26532239)
I agree but consider that Homer, one of the greatest storytellers of all time, was most likely illiterate. I've also met people who are outstanding at computer science but struggle with coding. I just think they're different skills and the people who can do both know how smart and important they are. It's sometimes a source of discouragement when the aim is to teach coding as a form of literacy. I read a story once where this company a few decades ago tricked a group of secretaries into learning to code LISP because they didn't tell these women that what they were doing was programming. Similar to the airline ticket salespeople who used to do things like edit raw memory in their sabre terminals, which is something most programmers today would believe they're not smart enough to do. It's amazing how clever people are at figuring things out if we avoid thinking about technology labor with the classic division of labor assembly line model.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Outgrowing Software by lifeisstillgood on Sunday March 21, 2021 @02:42PM (#26532762)
I seem to remember a similar using LISP story - not tricking people but they gave sales team / admin lisp tools because they did not have time to code the "proper ones" - and the employees (women) rebelled when people tried to take them away. I want to say it was ... wrote much of netscape then ran a nightclub ... memory like a sieve I have.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Outgrowing Software by EdwardCoffin on Sunday March 21, 2021 @04:48PM (#26533854)
Rather than JWZ, you may be thinking of the Mailman system for customer service at Amazon in the early days, as recounted by Steve Yegge [1]

[1] https://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/tour-de-babel

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Outgrowing Software by Wowfunhappy on Sunday March 21, 2021 @11:17PM (#26536495)
> I read a story once where this company a few decades ago tricked a group of secretaries into learning to code LISP because they didn't tell these women that what they were doing was programming.

I'd like to read this if anyone can find it. :)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Outgrowing Software by kazinator on Monday March 22, 2021 @01:13AM (#26537067)
That was written by Richard Stallman, and is right on the GNU website:

https://www.gnu.org/gnu/rms-lisp.html

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Outgrowing Software by lifeisstillgood on Sunday March 21, 2021 @10:37AM (#26530761)
By saying " ed few can do the hard stuff", is that not redefining use of maths to an arbitrary cutoff line.

Think of all the instances of maths used globally. Do the millions of people who more or less get the idea of an average - this is used across politics, and common discourse. Does that count as maths? I would say yes, just as a for loop is programming. No we are not expecting a compiler but just "arranging the world so it can be easily iterated over" is a fine common objective.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Outgrowing Software by fauigerzigerk on Sunday March 21, 2021 @11:29AM (#26531155)
>Does that count as maths?

Yes, that's exactly what I meant when I said "a little bit of it".

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Outgrowing Software by nickthemagicman on Sunday March 21, 2021 @09:03AM (#26530073)
Language is just a tool to express a collection of ideas.

The reason programming is not an extension of our natural language is because we haven't included those concepts in our natural language yet.

The world would be way better off if everyone had better logic and analytical thinking ability

[ Parent | on HN ]