The Demise of the Art of Programming

[Kevin Spencer]

Martin Luther didn't quit the Catholic Church. Look where it got HIM! ;-)

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
What You Seek Is What You Get.

 

[Guest]

I think that the large number of requests for chunks of code that work and
solve a specific problem is indicative of a larger problem. That is the
learning curve associated with dot net. Microsoft is making a tacit
admission that they have a problem when they have to announce a lite version
of the stuff for people to learn before they move on to the rest of the
framework. Strict object oriented programming is difficult to learn. I have
been a VFP developer for a number of years with products under my belt that
have sold in the thousands of installations. Making the jump to dot net is
daunting in that you have to think like microsoft to use the help and find
the answers you need. If you know what you are looking for you can find it.
If you dont' think like MS and use the correct terms you are lost. imho Bob
Thickens

Hi Brice,

I'm not a frustrated idealist. I'm an idealist. Not sure what I should be
frustrated about! ;-)

If you think I'm frustrated with all the shade-tree developers out there,
I'm not. Less competition. However, my compassion moves me to help them in
some fashion. Hence, this (and other similar) thread. The original post was
intended to make people think, examine themselves, and see if they could or
should be doing better. Whether anyone DOES or not is not my responsibility,
and I happily recuse myself from it!

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
What You Seek Is What You Get.

Kevin:::

I read your initial post and have to weigh in on this issue. Don't be such
a
frustrated idealist! Let me off another perception here for you to
consider.

I believe Microsoft is slowly redefining what it means to be a software
engineer today. The evolutionary move in software engineering from writing
pure syntactical code to integrating UIs with logic code substantially
redefined what it meant to be a programmer and it will happen again with
the
continued improvements of the .Net framework, namely, by increased managed
code and incorporation of new and improved classes, objects, etc.

I believe that today's programming technology paradigm represents a
parabolic curve of sorts. While memory management, addresses,
multi-threading
and the like are becoming easier to program against, understanding and
programming against the complexity of abstruse relationships among and
between the objects in an OOP world is becoming much more challenging
today.
(Yes, I believe that multi-threading will eventually become obsolete [by
advances made to processors either through biotechnology, nanotechnology
or
both], and therefore unnecessary to achieve FUTURE optimal application
performance.)

This challenge is due in part to the colossal number of options, methods,
functions, objects, procedures, etc. which today's programmer has
immediate
access. I suspect that these capabilities will continue to increase in
complexity as Microsoft advances its .Net technology. It is within this
deep
divide that will ostensibly distinguish the "average" programmer from the
gifted one.

You can ask for and apply "canned" code all day to your application but if
you don't understand the SPECIFIC logic relationships that function among
and
between ALL of your objects within a particular application, you will
NEVER
rise to the level of programming talent that I believe will be required to
survive as a programmer in the next 15 years.

In many respects, computer programming today is limited only by the
creative
potential of a human mind (that understands logic processes). Given this
belief, computer programming that achieves the highest levels of
computational functionality will always be more endemic of an art than a
science.

My 2 cents worth.

Brice Richard

 

[Juan T. Llibre]

re:

Microsoft is making a tacit admission that they have
a problem when they have to announce a lite version
of the stuff for people to learn before they move on to
the rest of the framework.

Which "lite version" is that ?

I think that the large number of requests for chunks of code that work and
solve a specific problem is indicative of a larger problem. That is the
learning curve associated with dot net. Microsoft is making a tacit
admission that they have a problem when they have to announce a lite
version
of the stuff for people to learn before they move on to the rest of the
framework. Strict object oriented programming is difficult to learn. I
have
been a VFP developer for a number of years with products under my belt
that
have sold in the thousands of installations. Making the jump to dot net
is
daunting in that you have to think like microsoft to use the help and find
the answers you need. If you know what you are looking for you can find
it.
If you dont' think like MS and use the correct terms you are lost. imho
Bob
Thickens

Hi Brice,

I'm not a frustrated idealist. I'm an idealist. Not sure what I should be
frustrated about! ;-)

If you think I'm frustrated with all the shade-tree developers out there,
I'm not. Less competition. However, my compassion moves me to help them
in
some fashion. Hence, this (and other similar) thread. The original post
was
intended to make people think, examine themselves, and see if they could
or
should be doing better. Whether anyone DOES or not is not my
responsibility,
and I happily recuse myself from it!

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
What You Seek Is What You Get.

message

Kevin:::

I read your initial post and have to weigh in on this issue. Don't be
such
a
frustrated idealist! Let me off another perception here for you to
consider.

I believe Microsoft is slowly redefining what it means to be a software
engineer today. The evolutionary move in software engineering from
writing
pure syntactical code to integrating UIs with logic code substantially
redefined what it meant to be a programmer and it will happen again
with
the
continued improvements of the .Net framework, namely, by increased
managed
code and incorporation of new and improved classes, objects, etc.

I believe that today's programming technology paradigm represents a
parabolic curve of sorts. While memory management, addresses,
multi-threading
and the like are becoming easier to program against, understanding and
programming against the complexity of abstruse relationships among and
between the objects in an OOP world is becoming much more challenging
today.
(Yes, I believe that multi-threading will eventually become obsolete
[by
advances made to processors either through biotechnology,
nanotechnology
or
both], and therefore unnecessary to achieve FUTURE optimal application
performance.)

This challenge is due in part to the colossal number of options,
methods,
functions, objects, procedures, etc. which today's programmer has
immediate
access. I suspect that these capabilities will continue to increase in
complexity as Microsoft advances its .Net technology. It is within this
deep
divide that will ostensibly distinguish the "average" programmer from
the
gifted one.

You can ask for and apply "canned" code all day to your application but
if
you don't understand the SPECIFIC logic relationships that function
among
and
between ALL of your objects within a particular application, you will
NEVER
rise to the level of programming talent that I believe will be required
to
survive as a programmer in the next 15 years.

In many respects, computer programming today is limited only by the
creative
potential of a human mind (that understands logic processes). Given
this
belief, computer programming that achieves the highest levels of
computational functionality will always be more endemic of an art than
a
science.

My 2 cents worth.

Brice Richard