What is a programmer?
About the times, about morals. Today in Toaster I saw a topic in which a person admitted that while working as a java-developer, he knows algebra and geometry at the 6th grade level and asked for advice on textbooks. This request undoubtedly causes respect - a person wants to learn.
Start over. I studied at a good physical school in the 90s. Read between the lines - according to the Soviet program. This could be the end, because far from all of them studied in a good school for mathematics under the Soviet program, which means that, by definition, I am terribly divorced from the people. And just do not understand anything in life.
Yes, we started coding in the third grade, and it was not Hogwarts , not a laboratory for pumping egg heads - all were ordinary guys and girls from the district. Very few with engineering and scientific blood. We had a cool math. And still cool work, physical education and history. Everything was saturated with consistency. Did you know in school that history is a science, systematized, filled with internal logic, laid down in tables and conclusions? Know it so. Did you know that the Russian language is described so strictly that almost any situation in it can be solved algorithmically?
')
In high school, we forced the matan so much so that later a couple of courses at the university could rest. What many, by the way, and burned. And no, they were not geniuses, the brain was boiling, the distribution of assessments was the same as elsewhere - losers, troechnik, horoshist, nerdy. The nerds were geniuses, yes. Pupils of the physics and mathematics schools did not like nerds as they do not like everywhere. Which again proves that we were not special. This is important for later discussion.
In computer science lessons we solved the same problems from matan - we found the roots of equations, built graphs. We studied the basic construction of languages ​​- types, data structures, algorithms, work with memory, there was a little Delphi and OOP. Basically, of course, Pascal. For common development were C and Assembler. A little bit flooded the database at the end, of course, with normalizations. They studied binary algebra and made fun games.
And not even all of this took place, the class was divided into Programmers and Users. Users learned HTML and Photoshop, handed over the site.
And we always knew that we are not programmers, we are so shkolota. Programmers are those who write books. These are the ones who create the OS and the real software. We believed that to become a Programmer, you need to teleport somewhere to IBM or Microsoft. And you cannot even investigate the function of continuity properly - where you go.
It happened to me that I began to come into contact with programming more than 10 years after leaving school. Everything has changed - the web has appeared, a bunch of strange words and names. I knew for sure that these geniuses — Programmers who create a commercial product — had already gone very far, to some kind of parallel cosmic worlds, where I would never get them. That I will come to them, and they will tell me: “Brother, what is your blog in PHP? Let's create a dynamic array for me through recursion, then we'll talk. ”
And it is fair. After all, I know for sure that a programmer is not even a profession. This is an engineer specialization.
Suspicions began to creep in when I began to read questions on the Toaster in the spirit of “Does a programmer need mathematics?”. And the answers in the spirit of "solving routine tasks for Lendos does not require mathematics."
And here I see that the Java developer asks to advise a school textbook on mathematics.
I understand that this area is hungry for personnel, that the range of tasks has been simplified, that the entry threshold is low, and so on. I agree that if a person performs work, then he is good, and let him do it on health. Benefits society, feeds the family and so on. I don’t have any arrogance towards the developers at all;
In my head, Starpere's rhetorical question revolves: "What about culture?" I think that this question is generally the main one for the sane engineer, but this is a separate article. Is the creativity in programming so much inferior to the artisan that only the fruits are important and no one even stutters about the roots of them feeding? How can a person even think about the question “Does a programmer need mathematics?” And how generally debased and devalued is the proud title of Programmer? Doesn't anyone talk about developer culture? Or have we come to the point that nobody already understands this? Then where will you get this desired desired your code, if not from the culture of thought?
Friends, tell me that I am an old (thirty-three year old) marazmatik. Or confirm that the world is rolling into some kind of hell. I propose to expand the hot discussion in the comments. But then, nothing is clear ...
UPD
So, after less than a day of desperate breaking spears, a picture emerged.
These are purely my conclusions.
Let's go in order.
Dedicated to those who read the post and eager to rush into battle, and read 100+ comments, of course, not leisure. The following text will clarify something.
Purpose of the first post
Almost everyone misunderstood the purpose of the post. I have never claimed that a programmer without mathematics is unprofitable and will not be able to work. I did not blame anyone, did not humiliate and did not throw mud at them for their lack of knowledge of math in any volume. My task was to find out what the community thinks about the professional culture of the programmer in the form in which I formulated it. At least drew attention to this fact commentators.
From what I draw the following conclusion.
Culture
According to my observations, a very small part of the readers is ready to perceive the word “culture” as a meaningful concept, having more meaning for them than going to the theater or not spitting on a neighbor. It does not say anything bad about people, it is simply a statement of some perceptual filters. If the concept of “culture” (like any other concept) has a developed content in a person’s mind, he analyzes the text in connection with the entire volume of meanings that this concept carries and discusses at the level of these meanings as well. The absolute majority of commentators discussed with me at the level of professional suitability and the solution of production problems, the question of which was not raised in the source text at all. If you re-read the text again, then it all leads to the last paragraph with the question “What about culture?” Then the paragraph is followed by questions that are the meaning and content of the topic. A whole paragraph of questions solely on culture, and no one answers about culture.
I conclude that the majority of commentators do not understand what is at stake when there is a question about the culture of professional activity.
Why?
I have my own version, I will throw it for a change. For nearly a century, a person was taught in our country that he was a production cadre. What is private is negligible before the public. What is its social role is its content. That culture is splint and rules of conduct. What if it took place as a worker, then it has reached the heights of human evolution. This matrix lives its own life in society, and is not going to go anywhere yet. Now, in conjunction with market goal setting in education (I teach not in the name of science, but in the name of employment), fueled by the ideas of individual success and efficiency, any conscious citizen understands that the main thing is to be confused in his narrow subject and not to see anything else. It is best to start coding earlier than walking, and biology with geography generally throws nafig, because high-level solutions like google will solve all the problems.
And here we go to another problem.
Education
Education is widely perceived by commentators as refresher courses. If we develop the idea to the limit, we get that school education is not necessary at all. Read and write can learn and so. And then sit and write the code, because even HL ++ projects, as life shows, can be done without being a professor. The rest is googly.
We cross our findings for the development of our thoughts.
Such an attitude to education is an uncultured attitude, as any expert in education will confirm. But since the word culture for most commentators has no meaning other than a compliment, and lack of culture is an insult, then this thesis can hardly be understood correctly.
The second problem of education, and it is more obvious, is that commentators generally perceive mathematics as another area of ​​activity. This at least means that mathematics was taught to them mainly as an algebraic account and formulas that need to be crammed. Not like science. Teaching mathematics as a science is possible in the first grade. It only means to focus on consistent reasoning, and not on bison. I want to note that ALL exact knowledge, including applied knowledge, is based on rigorous definitions and definitions. Any reasoning is built on a tree if something else. Without this device, even html can not be written. It is embedded in all of us because of belonging to a society that operates with such a device. Mathematics is a simulator for mastering this apparatus and the key to effective work with abstractions of any level. Considering that all engineering professions, including programming, are built on a mathematical apparatus, it is strange to call it a separate type of activity. This shows a simple misunderstanding of where you went. This may be unimportant from the point of view of solving a working task, but it is very important from the point of view of culture.
Conclusion
Everyone determines for himself what to teach or not to teach. I only insist that there is a concept of culture, and it applies to programming as well. It is very irrational, because it assumes that a person can not afford not to do something that can not be done . Yes, you can’t do everything, but in this situation there is at least an idea in your head that we should strive for this. From the point of view of the enterprise's economy, this is absurd, from the point of view of its development, as a person, is a necessity.
Start over. I studied at a good physical school in the 90s. Read between the lines - according to the Soviet program. This could be the end, because far from all of them studied in a good school for mathematics under the Soviet program, which means that, by definition, I am terribly divorced from the people. And just do not understand anything in life.
Yes, we started coding in the third grade, and it was not Hogwarts , not a laboratory for pumping egg heads - all were ordinary guys and girls from the district. Very few with engineering and scientific blood. We had a cool math. And still cool work, physical education and history. Everything was saturated with consistency. Did you know in school that history is a science, systematized, filled with internal logic, laid down in tables and conclusions? Know it so. Did you know that the Russian language is described so strictly that almost any situation in it can be solved algorithmically?
')
In high school, we forced the matan so much so that later a couple of courses at the university could rest. What many, by the way, and burned. And no, they were not geniuses, the brain was boiling, the distribution of assessments was the same as elsewhere - losers, troechnik, horoshist, nerdy. The nerds were geniuses, yes. Pupils of the physics and mathematics schools did not like nerds as they do not like everywhere. Which again proves that we were not special. This is important for later discussion.
In computer science lessons we solved the same problems from matan - we found the roots of equations, built graphs. We studied the basic construction of languages ​​- types, data structures, algorithms, work with memory, there was a little Delphi and OOP. Basically, of course, Pascal. For common development were C and Assembler. A little bit flooded the database at the end, of course, with normalizations. They studied binary algebra and made fun games.
And not even all of this took place, the class was divided into Programmers and Users. Users learned HTML and Photoshop, handed over the site.
And we always knew that we are not programmers, we are so shkolota. Programmers are those who write books. These are the ones who create the OS and the real software. We believed that to become a Programmer, you need to teleport somewhere to IBM or Microsoft. And you cannot even investigate the function of continuity properly - where you go.
It happened to me that I began to come into contact with programming more than 10 years after leaving school. Everything has changed - the web has appeared, a bunch of strange words and names. I knew for sure that these geniuses — Programmers who create a commercial product — had already gone very far, to some kind of parallel cosmic worlds, where I would never get them. That I will come to them, and they will tell me: “Brother, what is your blog in PHP? Let's create a dynamic array for me through recursion, then we'll talk. ”
And it is fair. After all, I know for sure that a programmer is not even a profession. This is an engineer specialization.
Suspicions began to creep in when I began to read questions on the Toaster in the spirit of “Does a programmer need mathematics?”. And the answers in the spirit of "solving routine tasks for Lendos does not require mathematics."
And here I see that the Java developer asks to advise a school textbook on mathematics.
I understand that this area is hungry for personnel, that the range of tasks has been simplified, that the entry threshold is low, and so on. I agree that if a person performs work, then he is good, and let him do it on health. Benefits society, feeds the family and so on. I don’t have any arrogance towards the developers at all;
In my head, Starpere's rhetorical question revolves: "What about culture?" I think that this question is generally the main one for the sane engineer, but this is a separate article. Is the creativity in programming so much inferior to the artisan that only the fruits are important and no one even stutters about the roots of them feeding? How can a person even think about the question “Does a programmer need mathematics?” And how generally debased and devalued is the proud title of Programmer? Doesn't anyone talk about developer culture? Or have we come to the point that nobody already understands this? Then where will you get this desired desired your code, if not from the culture of thought?
Friends, tell me that I am an old (thirty-three year old) marazmatik. Or confirm that the world is rolling into some kind of hell. I propose to expand the hot discussion in the comments. But then, nothing is clear ...
UPD
So, after less than a day of desperate breaking spears, a picture emerged.
These are purely my conclusions.
Let's go in order.
Dedicated to those who read the post and eager to rush into battle, and read 100+ comments, of course, not leisure. The following text will clarify something.
Purpose of the first post
Almost everyone misunderstood the purpose of the post. I have never claimed that a programmer without mathematics is unprofitable and will not be able to work. I did not blame anyone, did not humiliate and did not throw mud at them for their lack of knowledge of math in any volume. My task was to find out what the community thinks about the professional culture of the programmer in the form in which I formulated it. At least drew attention to this fact commentators.
From what I draw the following conclusion.
Culture
According to my observations, a very small part of the readers is ready to perceive the word “culture” as a meaningful concept, having more meaning for them than going to the theater or not spitting on a neighbor. It does not say anything bad about people, it is simply a statement of some perceptual filters. If the concept of “culture” (like any other concept) has a developed content in a person’s mind, he analyzes the text in connection with the entire volume of meanings that this concept carries and discusses at the level of these meanings as well. The absolute majority of commentators discussed with me at the level of professional suitability and the solution of production problems, the question of which was not raised in the source text at all. If you re-read the text again, then it all leads to the last paragraph with the question “What about culture?” Then the paragraph is followed by questions that are the meaning and content of the topic. A whole paragraph of questions solely on culture, and no one answers about culture.
I conclude that the majority of commentators do not understand what is at stake when there is a question about the culture of professional activity.
Why?
I have my own version, I will throw it for a change. For nearly a century, a person was taught in our country that he was a production cadre. What is private is negligible before the public. What is its social role is its content. That culture is splint and rules of conduct. What if it took place as a worker, then it has reached the heights of human evolution. This matrix lives its own life in society, and is not going to go anywhere yet. Now, in conjunction with market goal setting in education (I teach not in the name of science, but in the name of employment), fueled by the ideas of individual success and efficiency, any conscious citizen understands that the main thing is to be confused in his narrow subject and not to see anything else. It is best to start coding earlier than walking, and biology with geography generally throws nafig, because high-level solutions like google will solve all the problems.
And here we go to another problem.
Education
Education is widely perceived by commentators as refresher courses. If we develop the idea to the limit, we get that school education is not necessary at all. Read and write can learn and so. And then sit and write the code, because even HL ++ projects, as life shows, can be done without being a professor. The rest is googly.
We cross our findings for the development of our thoughts.
Such an attitude to education is an uncultured attitude, as any expert in education will confirm. But since the word culture for most commentators has no meaning other than a compliment, and lack of culture is an insult, then this thesis can hardly be understood correctly.
The second problem of education, and it is more obvious, is that commentators generally perceive mathematics as another area of ​​activity. This at least means that mathematics was taught to them mainly as an algebraic account and formulas that need to be crammed. Not like science. Teaching mathematics as a science is possible in the first grade. It only means to focus on consistent reasoning, and not on bison. I want to note that ALL exact knowledge, including applied knowledge, is based on rigorous definitions and definitions. Any reasoning is built on a tree if something else. Without this device, even html can not be written. It is embedded in all of us because of belonging to a society that operates with such a device. Mathematics is a simulator for mastering this apparatus and the key to effective work with abstractions of any level. Considering that all engineering professions, including programming, are built on a mathematical apparatus, it is strange to call it a separate type of activity. This shows a simple misunderstanding of where you went. This may be unimportant from the point of view of solving a working task, but it is very important from the point of view of culture.
Conclusion
Everyone determines for himself what to teach or not to teach. I only insist that there is a concept of culture, and it applies to programming as well. It is very irrational, because it assumes that a person can not afford not to do something that can not be done . Yes, you can’t do everything, but in this situation there is at least an idea in your head that we should strive for this. From the point of view of the enterprise's economy, this is absurd, from the point of view of its development, as a person, is a necessity.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/349106/
All Articles