should I learn to program?

is it fun? and if I learn to program, what programs should I make? I can only think of games, but that would be too complicated plus I hate casual games. maybe I should take out my highschool math textbook and try to solve the questions by programming? what else?

no

depends on the meaning of fun, the projects you code and the language and libraries you use, if any.

is it fun?
For some.

I hate casual games
So? You don't have to use everything you make. Actually, it will be some time before you can make anything remotely usable.
To draw a comparison, think of a potter who makes a vase and then shatters it to pieces.

maybe I should take out my highschool math textbook and try to solve the questions by programming?
Few problems are less interesting or instructive than that.

should I learn to program?
If you need to ask this, the answer is "probably not".

I think anyone whose mind is really cut-out for coding (and being very proficient with computer technology in general) will just dive in on their own because they are naturally very curious and absorb information best that way.

Not to discourage people who haven't already started their own adventure of figuring these things out, of course.

>>5
What load of fairy bollocks. Your impression of human intellect is incongruous. Minds are not cut-out for a single branch. What maeks a good programmer is time spent studying, time spent writing code, time spent thinking about code, and obviously for specific tasks (such as games), knowledge of physics is required. It's not some exploratory cave-game where the curious are bestowed endowents.

>>6
Yes it is.

>>6
If a person's curiosity is great enough it will result in those actions being taken, or something of that sort, however maybe some minds may be less suitable for programming than others.
Thus the requirements would be along these lines:
1)Curious enough
2)Having a strong desire to learn
3)Being able to absorb new concepts and paradigms quickly/being smart enough and being able to understand basic logic/math.

There's likely other preferable qualities such as the amount of detail one can actively keep in mind, but I don't know if it's necessary. Advanced knowledge of math/physics is just domain specific knowledge required for making 3D games, if you were to work on an application to aid in bioinformatics research or do EDA design, you'd need knoweldge in those domains too.
The programmer should be able to acquire domain-specific knowledge as required so he can model his problem better.

>>8
The programmer should be able to acquire domain-specific knowledge as required so he can model his problem better.
Good luck programming simulations without 5 years of calculus.

bitches and hoes

>>9

Where did you get the idea that making simulations is required to be a programmer? If that were the case, none of us would be here right now.

Sim Programmer™

>>8
I agree. Someone curious is at an obvious advantage compared to someone who needs you to hold their hand to teach them anything.
The curious one will spend more time researching on their own because they are genuinely interested in learning and understanding. For them, understanding is the end.
For the other, understanding is a means to reach a different end. If they could remove it altogether, they would.
The difference is motivation. The latter needs it to go on. The former doesn't.

maybe I should take out my highschool math textbook and try to solve the questions by programming?

There's this thing called Project Euler. You should look into that.

>>14
Project Euler: Find the one algorithm that's not O(n!)!!

Cool for a bit but that shit gets old.

>>15
The problems don't really seem all that similar to me.

What would you suggest for more interesting/varied problems?

>>16
On second thought, I just went back to Euler after only completing a couple problems before, and I noticed that there are at least 10 on the front page (the easiest problems) that are completely retarded.

The way to do P.Euler is to pick the oldest problems that the fewest have solved.  Merely taking them in order would be highly unsatisfactory.

>>6
It's just that I've always learned far more by experimentation and maybe browsing through some documentation than reading some tutorials or "books" (lol) and that anyone who can't do that is probably wasting their time.

Isn't that how the best "hackers" learn and get into it anyways?

>>19
Hackers need theory that come from books or some form of structured education. You can't learn the complete fundamentals just from browsing through documentations and experimentation. An ignorant hacker is not much of a hacker, after all, being a hacker is about solving problems well.

>>20
indeed.
books are one of the best resources for learning.
only 13yearold script kiddies and that invisible poster guy don't read books.

>>20
True. Many mathematicians turned programmers make good hackers.

you don't need to learn to program
just learn to copy/paste

See: FV

>>19 "learned far more by experimentation" Thats the meaning of hacking.
Computer scientists read books and follow theory, programmers read book and tutorials, Hackers code and hack away at the system without any books. Hacking is about exploration and DIY software, not learning computer theory.
I've never read any programming books, and will not read anything without a practical,useful purpose.
Coding is first priority, reading is when your approach fails and you need more data on the subject.
 


________________________________
http://bayimg.com/image/aadbjaace.jpg
Velox Et Astrum gamedev forum: http://etastrum.phpbb3now.com
My Blog: http://frozenvoid.blogspot.com/
«Truth is on the march, and nothing will stop it.»

Disregard the invisible poster