On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 22:01, Ricky Clarkson <[email protected]>wrote:

> I think the attitude is more that you can do everything you need to in
> the current language, so why would you want to switch?
>

Yea, probably so. Though this is pretty vague. It's no wonder opinions
differ so widely:

- "can do" -> yes, but how natural or awkward is it?
- "everything" -> everything-everything, or mostly-everything, or
everything-i-care-about-right-now?
- "to switch" -> what's the cost in effort/time/energy of acquiring the new
skills?
- what other benefits might said new skills bring down the line?

Think of it as an optimization problem. :-)

VBA, is Turing complete, so I could just write everything as macros in
Excel, but I choose not to.

// Ben


>
> On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Kevin Wright <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > None of this is intended to denigrate any of the languages mentioned, of
> > course.  And believe-it-or not I had no specific individuals in mind
> either.
> > But I am, and shall remain, convinced that computer science has learned a
> > trick or two since BASIC, or COBOL, or any of the others were created.
>  Some
> > of these advances are just too painful to retrofit to a language that
> quite
> > correctly places a high premium on backwards compatibility.
> > The forces acting here are powerful, and impossible to reconcile.  Which
> > means that as a language matures, new concepts become ever harder to
> adopt.
> >  Historically, such change has instead been managed by the creation of
> new
> > languages, for which backward compatibility is no longer an issue.
> > I'll repeat... This is in no manner detrimental to earlier languages,
> they
> > form an essential foundation to those that came later.  But is it truly
> > possible to embrace e.g. Pascal in preference to its immediate
> predecessor
> > (Algol), which was in turn written to avoid some of the known flaws in
> > Fortran - and yet simultaneously believe that Pascal is the pinnacle,
> that
> > past languages were mere coincidence, and that Pascal could never
> possibly
> > be improved upon?
> > It seems a strangely contradictory attitude to take in a profession that
> is
> > otherwise making bold steps to embrace change through power of agile
> > methodologies
> >
> >
> > On 3 October 2010 12:54, Kevin Wright <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Absolutely.  All of my experience is that developers willing to step
> >> outside of their box, and to learn new languages and ideas are better
> for
> >> it.
> >> Not only does the learning experience expose you to more examples of
> >> quality code, but you also end up with a larger "mental toolbox" of
> >> approaches to learn from.  I've already given JodaTime as an example of
> >> this, google collections is another, you can find many more if you shop
> >> around.
> >> Nowadays, we're even starting to see some category theory trickle back
> >> into
> >> Java:
> http://apocalisp.wordpress.com/2009/08/21/structural-pattern-matching-in-java/
>  All
> >> of this cross-fertilization is a Very Good Thing(tm).
> >> BASIC has its share of dogmatic and obstinate followers, unwilling to
> >> accept change.  As does COBOL, Pascal, Fortran, C#, etc. And yes, Java
> does
> >> too.
> >> Scala, F#, Haskell, Clojure... not so much.  These languages all still
> >> have very active communities, looking to explore the realms of what is
> >> possible and definitely not set in their ways - a description that I
> imagine
> >> any good developer would like to have applied to themselves.
> >> It's only natural, then, that a language actively seeking to push the
> >> state of the art will also attract like-minded developers.  But does
> this
> >> mean that it's therefore unsuitable for anyone else?  Of course not!
>  But
> >> there will always be some for whom their doctrine is a great comfort,
> and
> >> these people *will* find it distressing if they should ever have to move
> to
> >> a different language.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 3 October 2010 01:53, Liam Knox <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I agree though age of this exposure and the individuals mind set are
> >>> paramount.  Some people seem to be brain washed easily with other
> ideas,
> >>> Religion for example, and others have been able to refute them quite
> easily
> >>> based on alternative evidence regardless of the initial exposure time.
> >>>  There are other fundamental individual differences, for example life
> time
> >>> learners and those who seem to become very limited, very early.  This
> is not
> >>> unique to technology by any means.  I have seen both types of developer
> and
> >>> I personally can not attribute this purely to languages they initially
> >>> learned.  Indeed many of them were brought up on something more
> structured
> >>> such as C or Pascal or Modula II.  However they appear to be equally
> adapt
> >>> in using any languages and building complete crap or great systems with
> it.
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Kevin Wright <[email protected]
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Long-term lack of exposure to significant programming paradigms has
> got
> >>>> to impact your skills, how could it be otherwise?
> >>>> I've witnessed the pain of others in transitioning from procedural to
> >>>> object-oriented methodologies, it isn't pretty!
> >>>> I've also seen OO abused when treated as the only paradigm in town.
> >>>>  It's the old story, "when all you have is a hammer..."
> >>>> I highly recommend the fantastic "Execution in the Kingdom of Nouns"
> >>>> article for more on the subject:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/03/execution-in-kingdom-of-nouns.html
> >>>> Closer to home, it's impossible that anyone would create the
> universally
> >>>> hated Java Date/Time if they had first been exposed to functional
> >>>> programming and the correct use of immutable objects (ideas that
> JodaTime
> >>>> clearly embraced)
> >>>>
> >>>> So yes, BASIC can harm your skills, at least if you become
> >>>> institutionalised within the language.
> >>>> But it's not really BASIC that's at fault here, it's the concept if
> >>>> being locked into a particular (restricted) way of doing things, and
> then
> >>>> struggling to break free of the self-imposed prison that such an
> approach
> >>>> can create.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 3 October 2010 00:24, Liam Knox <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think its pretty irrelevant if you started on BASIC or any other
> >>>>> language for that matter and how that has impacted your current
> skills.
> >>>>>  Someone who feels they have been technically crippled permanently
> from
> >>>>> exposure to BASIC would likely be not very be technical anyway.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 12:33 AM, Russel Winder <[email protected]
> >
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sat, 2010-10-02 at 07:36 -0700, Cédric Beust ♔ wrote:
> >>>>>> [ . . . ]
> >>>>>> > Basic is definitely not receiving enough credit, in my opinion.
> >>>>>> > Actually, it's being unjustly vilified. Who was it again who said
> >>>>>> > that
> >>>>>> > anyone who started programming with Basic was irrecoverably
> corrupt
> >>>>>> > and would never become a good programmer?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Dijkstra, who is both the source of some great things that have
> >>>>>> benefited programming and software development, and things that have
> >>>>>> acted as barriers holding back software development for decades.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>        "It is practically impossible to teach good programming to
> >>>>>>        students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as
> potential
> >>>>>>        programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of
> >>>>>>        regeneration."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>        "I think of the company advertising 'Thought Processors' or
> the
> >>>>>>        college pretending that learning BASIC suffices or at least
> >>>>>>        helps, whereas the teaching of BASIC should be rated as a
> >>>>>>        criminal offence: it mutilates the mind beyond recovery."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> > I bet that a lot of people on this list started programming with
> >>>>>> > Basic
> >>>>>> > (myself included), and I think we turned out alright :-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hummm... people who started with Basic and yet have become good
> >>>>>> programmers in a number of languages must have great powers of
> >>>>>> recovery
> >>>>>> and regeneration.  This must mean they are either vampires or trolls
> >>>>>> ;-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Russel.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> =============================================================================
> >>>>>> Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip:
> >>>>>> sip:[email protected] <sip%[email protected]>
> >>>>>> 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp:
> [email protected]
> >>>>>> London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >>>>> Groups "The Java Posse" group.
> >>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >>>>> [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]>
> .
> >>>>> For more options, visit this group at
> >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Kevin Wright
> >>>>
> >>>> mail / gtalk / msn : [email protected]
> >>>> pulse / skype: kev.lee.wright
> >>>> twitter: @thecoda
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >>>> Groups "The Java Posse" group.
> >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >>>> [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]>
> .
> >>>> For more options, visit this group at
> >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> >>> "The Java Posse" group.
> >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >>> [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]>
> .
> >>> For more options, visit this group at
> >>> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Kevin Wright
> >>
> >> mail / gtalk / msn : [email protected]
> >> pulse / skype: kev.lee.wright
> >> twitter: @thecoda
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Kevin Wright
> >
> > mail / gtalk / msn : [email protected]
> > pulse / skype: kev.lee.wright
> > twitter: @thecoda
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "The Java Posse" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]>
> .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> > http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
> >
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "The Java Posse" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<javaposse%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.

Reply via email to