Why do programmers need to study the art of programming?

Why do programmers need to study the art of programming?

By sinp. Camden
Translation: purpleendurer, 1st

Introduction: simp Camden encourages programmers to review the history of the programming industry, pay close attention to the latest developments in the industry, and accumulate knowledge to understand the depth and depth of the industry.

 

 

For common programmers working on the front line, discussing Computing Theory is like talking about the chemical nature of nitrate in the rain of bullets: it may be true, but it is not directly helpful to solve the problem. When a new problem on the Web user interface of the old application system that we want to solve has reached a final time limit, why waste of time imagining Haskell (Haskel) and Alan Kay (Alan. kay) What is the result of the fight? Why are we concerned about whether we are using a monad or an error status is returned when an exception occurs? What does "orthogonal (orthogonal)" mean? Don't give me a research report, just give me the code that can work. So "tomorrow ".

 

* Purpleendurer Note: For more information about monad, see:
Http://zh.wikibooks.org/wiki/Haskell/%E7%90%86%E8%A7%A3monads

 

In the view of many project managers, programmers involved in computing theory pose a greater risk than a waste of time: their new approach threatens the project. This attitude is not totally unreasonable. Every promise will completely change the new idea of software development, and it seems to be quite harmful to the industry before the hype fades out and finds a proper place in the toolbox for programmers. By converting these theories, we try to put every problem into a new model, whether this is suitable or not. Just as an astonishing misuse of evolution provides a reason for the Nazi slaughter. For example, the misuse of object-oriented language has led to a variety of bad programming practices on the modifier name (may God forgive my soul ).

The history of programming is dotted with frustration and swing. I remember the famous saying that Dijkstra's "go to statement is harmful", which allows many programmers to create various weird and distorted codes to avoid using Goto, even if there are some urgent needs. Blind obedience to structured programming and other rules is very dangerous. When I was working on the ANSI subcommittee, someone raised an objection that "programming is not always structured," I replied: "I do not agree with structured programming." The silent vibration on everyone's face made me estimate that I would be immediately delisted. If Ken Lister, my friend and mentor, did not speak or explain, I would indeed end up. Ken Liszt said, I mean a dognistic explanation against the principles of structured programming. He was right, even though I thought he had played down my bold assertions.

However, the pursuit of programming theory makes us better. If not all of this wisdom is used to improve software development practices, we will be constrained to place machine commands on paper tapes or draw forms in Windows Visual Basic. "There must be a better way !" Thank God, there are always people talking about this sentence.

Developers of programming languages are not just those who improve their work under the same conditions. Despite the fanatic risks, skilled programmers use their skills in their field by breaking through the strictly defined responsibility box, they can also enhance their contributions (hopefully their careers will also be the same ). Especially when it only lies in their field of vision, "How can we improve software development as a discipline ?" This problem may produce a significant return. The danger lies in previous learning and lack of self-evaluation. Because Alexander Pope (Alexander pubai)
Criticism (batch comment) has a famous saying:

 

A little learning is a dangerous thing ;)
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring .)

Professional programmers should have a deep understanding. By cultivating a broad and profound understanding of the industry, accumulating historical knowledge, and paying close attention to the latest developments, his or her wisdom will grow, so that every tool can make its best use. (End)

 

Original English text