I am no longer an *effective* coder in the same sense Dave describes. But that doesn't mean I can't read and write code in a number of languages and idioms. But it does mean that nobody should pay me for that work except insomuch as it is incidental to what I'm *really* doing for their filthy lucre. It is very handy that I *can* read/write code across a wide spectrum of languages/idioms, but far from acutely useful... If I had to make a living doing it, I might be able to scrape enough rust off to be useful with it in a few restricted contexts, and probably paid out at roughly minimum wage, suggesting I would only take that kind of work in lieu of pumping gas (nobody outside of NJ/OR/NZ) actually pumps gas for a living anymore?! I could probably do better cutting firewood or as a handyman or shade-tree mechanic. And in the latter two cases, my main value would be triage/addressing of trivial problems followed by prescribing one kind of specialist or another for the actual skilled labor implied in many cases.
I think that learning coding skills is something valuable to add to one's toolbox, not unlike learning how to weld/solder/braze (minimally) or do rough carpentry or learn the basics of fasteners and sealers (glue, nails, screws, caulk, varnish, paint, oil, etc.) The open question here is perhaps how well it helps one learn to communicate with humans (thus co-). I think it expands one's metaphorical domains to work with, but it is more universally useful to describe a linear set of logical instructions into something more familiar like a Recipe or some colloquialism like "rinse... repeat" or navigational instructions (how to get here from there) or assemble furniture (open the box, inspect the contents, consider the final configuration, skim the directions for unexpected dependencies, execute step 1, iterate through numbered steps to final, VIOLA bookcase!) I find that *many* capable coders are NOT particularly capable communicators. Among other things, their empathy is often stunted, possibly by being too focused on *rigor* vs *clarity* in the sense of GEPR/NST's discussion upthread. On the other hand, following Glen's conception of "self-programming" I think the Mr. Myagi/Karate Kid example is a good one. We learn a set of actions, independent of understanding final purpose, ultimately developing a set of universal skills which are equally good for waxing a car or brushing aside an opponent's strike. I don't know that Myagi nor the KK were coders by the definition here... but in a fairly strong sense, that was what was going on. Similarly, a lot of conventional rote learning is like that.... the way we learn our times-tables, or diagram sentences, study for an anatomy or biology exam. My $.02 (inflation adjusted) - Steve On 1/27/21 11:45 AM, Prof David West wrote: > Nick, > > I am no longer a good programmer/coder, although once ... Really good > coders like Glen, Marcus, Jon ... on the list, will probably disagree > with me; but: > > Coding/programming is not communication — if restricted to coder ----> > machine -----> machine action. The machine is nothing more than the > embodiment of a mathematical abstraction and coding is analogous to > rearranging the symbols in a mathematical expression, such that, when > resolved, the expression yields different results. > > No boss says what you quoted, but few programmers have not had the > experience of "the damn machine keeps doing what I told it, instead of > what I want." > > But — a program has two audiences: the machine (no communication here) > and other programmers (tons of miscommunication here). This is what > the reference from Eric Smith talks about. There is an entire, usually > ignored, paradigm in computer science called "literate programming" — > the most prominent advocate, Donald Knuth. > > If one were skilled at literate programming, one would be > communicating to another programmer (or herself at a later point in > time) all the knowledge and meaning necessary for the latter to > understand, modify, enhance, or correct the program as needs be. *_If > possible_* this would be a communication skill worth developing — > might lead to more precise and accurate communication outside the > world of the computer. > > *"If possible,"* is key. Many, starting with Peter Naur, would argue > that this kind of programmer-to=programmer communication is impossible > because the medium, the code plus any written documentation, is too > impoverished to communicate what needs to be communicated. In Naur's > world, programming is joint theory building — a theory of "an affair > in the world and how the program (addresses) it." Code and > documentation represent maybe a tenth of that theory, the remainder > being in the heads of those who developed it. > > davew > > > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021, at 10:56 AM, thompnicks...@gmail.com > <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> This flies in the face of my belief that you coders know something >> about life that we citizens need to know. I imagine coding to be >> like trying to write an instruction to a person such that that person >> always does what you want them to do. So, it is an act of >> communication in which the communicatee is always right, no matter >> how idiotic may be it’s response. No boss ever says to a coder, >> “Your code was brilliant but unfortunately the machine didn’t >> understand you.” >> >> >> >> Am I right about any of that? >> >> >> >> Nick Thompson >> >> thompnicks...@gmail.com <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com> >> >> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ >> <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Prof David West >> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 27, 2021 11:41 AM >> *To:* friam@redfish.com >> *Subject:* [FRIAM] coding versus music >> >> >> >> >> For a while now there has been a huge push to teach kids how to code. >> Ostensibly because it enhances skills like language, logic, and math; >> plus, "computer literacy" is essential in a world filled with computers. >> >> >> >> A study at MIT suggests that coding skill is orthogonal to reading >> skill and has little, if any, influence on development of logic/math >> skills. >> >> >> >> An article in the Journal of Neuroscience argues that if you want to >> increase the "skills and brainpower" of kids you should teach them music. >> >> >> >> I came across this information peripherally and have not read the >> specific research reported on. I *_want_* the reports to be accurate >> representation of the research because it confirms long held biases >> against the value of "computational thinking" and computer science as >> a fundamental knowledge domain. >> >> >> >> dave west >> >> - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >> <http://bit.ly/virtualfriam> >> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> <http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com> >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >> <http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/> >> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >> <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/> >> > > > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
