Name: typical blogtard 2009-09-10 19:24
I hate computer languages because they force me to learn a bunch of shit that are completely irrelevant to what I want to use them for. When I design an application, I just want to build it. I don’t want to have to use a complex language to describe my intentions to a compiler. Here is what I want to do: I want to look into my bag of components, pick out the ones that I need and snap them together, and that’s it! That’s all I want to do.
I don’t want to know about how to implement loops, tree structures, search algorithms and all that other jazz. If I want my program to save an audio recording to a file, I don’t want to learn about frequency ranges, formats, fidelity, file library interface, audio library interface and so forth. This stuff really gets in the way. I just want to look into my bag of tricks, find what I need and drag them out. Sometimes, when I meditate about modern computer software development tools, I get so frustrated that I feel like screaming at the top of my lungs: That is all I want to do!
To me, one of the main reasons that the linguistic approach to programming totally sucks is that it is entirely descriptive by definition. This is a major drawback because it immediately forces you into a straightjacket. Unless you are ready to describe things in the prescribed, controlled format, you are not allowed to program a computer, sorry. The problem with this is that, we humans are tinkerers by nature. We like to play with toys. We enjoy trying various combinations of things to see how they fit together. We like the element of discovery that comes from not knowing exactly how things will behave if they are joined together or taken apart. We like to say things like, “oh”, “aah”, or “that’s cool” when we half-intentionally fumble our way into a surprising design that does exactly what we want it to do and more. Computer languages get in the way of this sort of pleasure because they were created by geeks for geeks. Geeks love to spoil your fun with a bunch of boring crap. For crying out loud, I don’t want to be a geek, even if I am one by necessity. I want to be happy. I want to do cool stuff. I want to build cool things. And, goddamnit, that’s all I want to do!
http://rebelscience.blogspot.com/2009/08/why-i-hate-all-computer-programming.html
Used to love coding when it was just the code I had to focus on. Then came windows and brought with it the creature called event driven programming. Now, I had to worry about every button click and butt itch the user has. Then came the glorious days of software industrialization and stacks. It becomes more and more obscure with the only focus seeming to be the enterprise. I believe a good percent (99%?) will be met with a bunch of standard components. Its not the code itself but how it is put together. I used to have the pride that I knew most of a language. But now its impossible with the amount of toolkits and libraries (standard and otherwise).
I actually agree with this comment, however.
I don’t want to know about how to implement loops, tree structures, search algorithms and all that other jazz. If I want my program to save an audio recording to a file, I don’t want to learn about frequency ranges, formats, fidelity, file library interface, audio library interface and so forth. This stuff really gets in the way. I just want to look into my bag of tricks, find what I need and drag them out. Sometimes, when I meditate about modern computer software development tools, I get so frustrated that I feel like screaming at the top of my lungs: That is all I want to do!
To me, one of the main reasons that the linguistic approach to programming totally sucks is that it is entirely descriptive by definition. This is a major drawback because it immediately forces you into a straightjacket. Unless you are ready to describe things in the prescribed, controlled format, you are not allowed to program a computer, sorry. The problem with this is that, we humans are tinkerers by nature. We like to play with toys. We enjoy trying various combinations of things to see how they fit together. We like the element of discovery that comes from not knowing exactly how things will behave if they are joined together or taken apart. We like to say things like, “oh”, “aah”, or “that’s cool” when we half-intentionally fumble our way into a surprising design that does exactly what we want it to do and more. Computer languages get in the way of this sort of pleasure because they were created by geeks for geeks. Geeks love to spoil your fun with a bunch of boring crap. For crying out loud, I don’t want to be a geek, even if I am one by necessity. I want to be happy. I want to do cool stuff. I want to build cool things. And, goddamnit, that’s all I want to do!
http://rebelscience.blogspot.com/2009/08/why-i-hate-all-computer-programming.html
Used to love coding when it was just the code I had to focus on. Then came windows and brought with it the creature called event driven programming. Now, I had to worry about every button click and butt itch the user has. Then came the glorious days of software industrialization and stacks. It becomes more and more obscure with the only focus seeming to be the enterprise. I believe a good percent (99%?) will be met with a bunch of standard components. Its not the code itself but how it is put together. I used to have the pride that I knew most of a language. But now its impossible with the amount of toolkits and libraries (standard and otherwise).
I actually agree with this comment, however.