If there is any profession that is built on the assumption that its practitioners constantly put aside time to stay up to date it is every profession that is even remotly connected to engineering.
Maybe many software devs don't view themselves as engineers, but engineers can be held liable if their work doesn't live up to the current technological standards.
I would say, regardless of what you do, sometimes you have to take some time for introspection, unless you plan to live with the consequences of not doing it. And reading books is part of that.
If your employer is smart they consider that. If you are smart you also consider that.
I am not sure how to respond to this. I have a family (wife + 2 kids, so admittedly a rather small one), a job, and a few side projects (not all of them even coding-related), and I still do find time to read books. But this requires planning and discipline from me, and is not easy. Besides, I was not talking about myself – my remark was general.
OTOH, this:
> Everyone has time to read if they want to.
translates in my dictionary roughly to "whoever wrote this probably knows very little about life". Paired with what looks like a slightly aggressive tone, it gives an impression of a young and very inexperienced person who thinks (consciously or not) that everyone's situation is like theirs and/or who is reluctant to take on responsibility. (Of course, everyone is a dog on the internet, so what do I know.)
OYAH, GP's
> 8 hours free assumming you work 1/3 and sleep the other
borders on offensive – I would suspect most people on the planet have very serious responsibilities besides work, and telling them that 1/3 of their time is "free" might (and frankly, maybe even should) result in a punch in the face. Instead of punching the GP, I wanted to (more or less) subtly point that out...
After more than 30 years of professional software engineering experience, I have to say that the software model described by this document is applicable and/or useful to only an extremely narrow subset of software in general. I would not recommend taking this advice too seriously.
John Ousterhout's "A Philosophy of Software Design". But this does prompt the question: If these two books about software/program design are so different then which is correct and why is there such a gap? In my experience (like kiitos above) I don't see much scope for HtDP for most industry programming and I have worked in few different domains.
This is a textbook for the introductory programming course, the first programming experience for many students. Maybe it would be better titled, "How to solve the programming exercises in an introductory course"
I see a lot of value in this. It gives a step-by-step method that students can follow, which often works. The prevailing alternative seems to be, "Look at a lot of examples, pick one that looks similar to the exercise, and change it around by trial and error until it kind of works." This does not generalize to professional level programming either.
At this initial stage, the goal is to build the students' confidence that if they work systematically, they can solve problems. As their education and experience continue, they can take on more realistic problems and methods.
22 comments
[ 4.8 ms ] story [ 52.6 ms ] thread* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35784167
* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35478871
* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32146245
* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16561815
Option 2: In lack of option 1, I am afraid one will have to spend ones free time on it.
Option 3: Take a "sabattical" or whatever it is called.
Option 4: Quit job and find an option 1 employer.
Maybe many software devs don't view themselves as engineers, but engineers can be held liable if their work doesn't live up to the current technological standards.
I would say, regardless of what you do, sometimes you have to take some time for introspection, unless you plan to live with the consequences of not doing it. And reading books is part of that.
If your employer is smart they consider that. If you are smart you also consider that.
OTOH, this:
> Everyone has time to read if they want to.
translates in my dictionary roughly to "whoever wrote this probably knows very little about life". Paired with what looks like a slightly aggressive tone, it gives an impression of a young and very inexperienced person who thinks (consciously or not) that everyone's situation is like theirs and/or who is reluctant to take on responsibility. (Of course, everyone is a dog on the internet, so what do I know.)
OYAH, GP's
> 8 hours free assumming you work 1/3 and sleep the other
borders on offensive – I would suspect most people on the planet have very serious responsibilities besides work, and telling them that 1/3 of their time is "free" might (and frankly, maybe even should) result in a punch in the face. Instead of punching the GP, I wanted to (more or less) subtly point that out...
I see a lot of value in this. It gives a step-by-step method that students can follow, which often works. The prevailing alternative seems to be, "Look at a lot of examples, pick one that looks similar to the exercise, and change it around by trial and error until it kind of works." This does not generalize to professional level programming either.
At this initial stage, the goal is to build the students' confidence that if they work systematically, they can solve problems. As their education and experience continue, they can take on more realistic problems and methods.