Ihe, This is the most depressing post on programming I have read in years!
Best regards, Pavel > On 24 Jun 2015, at 11:28, Ihe Onwuka <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 3:21 AM, Pavel Minaev <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Google is ultra-conservative in their approach to coding. > > Google and every bank and insurance company under the sun and god knows how > many other places but certainly the majority. > > <snip> > > but not because it's irrelevant or that I don't agree ......see comments at > end > > > Thing is, programmers are a pragmatic bunch. If it really does work better (= > lets them be more productive; you don't need to be a scientist to gauge > that), they'll get used to it, and will eventually grow fond of it, so long > as you don't force them to go all in on it right away. > > They are pragmatic in the sense that they generally won't bother learning > stuff if they don't have to and/or can't foresee being able to use it because > of the very reasons why you say you don't use XQuery/Haskell. At some (i.e > more than one) of the investment banks I've been, the standard methodology > for dealing with complexity is to crank out the debugger. When a guy there > tells you he is being pragmatic thats the sort of thing he means. > > A certain amount of bickering is to be expected, and there will always be > stalwart holdouts (I mean, we still have people signing a petition to bring > back VB6, 17 years later!), but overall the industry moves on. I'd rather be > an optimist on account of the direction of that movement and its ultimate > destination, than a pessimist on account of its speed, or the occasional > detour along the way. > > > Pavel if you work for Microsoft you are probably surrounded by smart > colleagues who have the capacity to get it which makes you an outlier (sorry > to use such a word). I remember sitting next to an MIT graduate on a flight > talking about the adjustment you have to make when you leave an environment > where you are surrounded by smart people so that you don't keep saying > DUHHHH! at the things and thoughts you encounter in the "real world". > > Functional programming enforces a design methodology that has the benign > side effect facilitating the conquering of complexity BUT ONLY IF YOU GET IT. > Those who don't will spend an entire weekend trying and failing to figure out > how to write a fibonacci function or come up with a 37 line solution if asked > to code Pascal's triangle. > > In an imperative coding environment a programmer can usually fashion > something that works (or gives the outward impression that it works). This is > not the case with functional programming which entails a totally different > thought process. So whereas FP is more productive for those who get it, it > renders those who don't incapable of producing anything at all and those who > don't make up the majority of the programming populace. > > It's always better to look and sound optimistic but the biggest influence on > what progress is made in the future will be how those in the present think > and in the main that has not really changed. > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] > http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk С уважением, Павел Велихов [email protected]
_______________________________________________ [email protected] http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
