[brk9912]

(12-14-2013 08:23 AM)randomForest Wrote:  

(12-13-2013 08:03 PM)kosko Wrote:  

That article in which the article came from was easily the biggest pile of crap I've read in a while. Strip away the fancy words and elitist speak, there is nothing there. She wrote nothing at all. I felt stupid after reading it because I don't do programming but I quickly realized neither does she, hense the reason she left out any specifics and just kept on abstracts that mean nothing.

Yes---this woman obviously isn't much of a programmer. She writes:

Quote:

We, as programmers, despite claiming that our field is "objective" have very subjective values that are entrenched in our discourse of programming language, particularly when it comes to the impossible-to-define term of "elegance".

What she obviously doesn't know is that the term "elegant" is usually reserved for code which carries out the assigned task in an extremely resource-efficient manner, with fewest lines of code, or with the simplest algorithm or design (and more often, some combination of all of the above). Far from being some mystical arcana of the programming realm, "elegance" is well-defined and entirely accessible---it is, in fact, fairly simple to understand, even if not easy to achieve.

For the record, I don't consider myself a proper programmer but I do write a lot of (high-level) code for my job. The fact that she doesn't get this is just more evidence that she is a poseur.

Out of all the women, few are actually bothered with the difficult aspects of engineering or creating working software in very difficult situations. Out of those few that do exist, they're very rare.