× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Mike - You're right - this thread is no longer about Code400.

Larry Paque
Code400-L moderator


Wills, Mike N. (TC) wrote:


I like this comment. Shouldn't this be on CPF000 or Non-Tech?

Anyways, I don't care how the eval statement knows that it is supposed to
add, subtract, multiply, divide, concatenate, or whatever else it does. All
I care is that it gives the output the documentation says it will.


So what then is the definition of a programmer? One who writes code from
scratch? In my opinion, that is stupid. If the code is written, and it
works, why write your own code every time?

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Naughton [mailto:mnaughton@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 2:44 PM
To: CODE/400 Discussion & Support
Subject: Re: RE: WDSC and Linux


CODE/400 Discussion & Support <code400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:


Every single programmer should have at least one year in which
they write in some sort of machine language and develop a small, working
operating system from scratch. And fit it into 8K.



I'm not going to argue with you, Joe, but I suspect that by this definition very few of us are "programmers". You set a high bar.

Using your definition, I bet most of us are "application assemblers".  But
I'm not sure there's anything wrong with that. For one thing, I think
even programming in machine language can be considered "assemblers" --
they're just assembling a lot more pieces that are all a lot smaller. For
another, I think practical reality drives most of us to understand the
tools and components we use in our assemblies at differing levels: some we
understand thoroughly, and some we we know just enough about to understand
how to use them effectively.

In fact, isn't that the point of encapsulation? You don't have to have a
clue as to what that darn object is doing on the inside -- all you have to
know is what messages you need to send it and what messages to expect
back. Now, that's not going to stop some of us from cracking apart those
objects to see what makes them tick, but it is really required that we do
so before we use them?

Mike Naughton
Senior Programmer/Analyst
Judd Wire, Inc.
124 Turnpike Road
Turners Falls, MA  01376
413-863-4357 x444
mnaughton@xxxxxxxxxxxx





As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.