Julia GalefVerified account

Probably not. Coding sounds easy and indeed 'coding' in the sense of plumbing together for loops,if statements and function calls can be learned in an afternoon.But from there to actually -coding- there is a massive gap that may take months or years. Maths doesn't feel like that

'learn to code' conflates two things, like 'anyone can learn to write' conflates being able to scribble words in a syntactically correct order vs being able to write a good novel

I thought when people say "learn to code" they generally meant "learn to code well enough to get a job as a software engineer"

When I say many can’t learn, I mean “Many cannot learn to write programs on the order of ‘Print the numbers between 1 and 50, substituting "Fizz" for #s divisible by 3, "Buzz" for #s divisible by 5, and "FizzBuzz" for both.'" This is a famous test for filtering job applicants.

There are CS grads who don't know how to do a four-part case statement inside a for loop?

Though the task does also function as a nerdsniper for people who feel like this task has jussst enough structure that God damn it there must be a more elegant solution than a case statement.

And if not, where do they draw the line between "things everyone can learn with effort" and "things some people won't be able to learn" ?

Anyone can learn open heart surgery. Anyone can learn quantum electrodynamics. But, it really is more true about programming than some other high-end disciplines, simply because the bulk of programming is no longer a high-end discipline. Most programmers are terrible at it.

Maybe a better way to think about it is... "Anyone can learn to write poetry." On the surface it's true. But writing actual good poetry is very hard. Most people don't want to read that poetry that anyone can learn to write.

I like this rather complex set of reflections from someone (Alan Kay) who spent several years trying to teach children to program: http://worrydream.com/EarlyHistoryOfSmalltalk/#smalltalkAndChildren … Just one perspective, but he took a serious shot.

Yes, I would say it about all endeavours and all people — including that example — if they are 1) interested and 2) unconflicted enough. (I wouldn't need to include "put in the effort", as that'd be implied by being interested in the relevant way + sufficiently unconflicted.)

"Being actually interested" is a high bar. It isn't a feeling. Nor an external reason. So "learning to program because it will get me money / parents' love / respect / save the world from AI" won't work. One has to be interested in *programming*.

Unfortunately she thinks it's innate skill, and doesn't factor how much more important passionate true interest is.

Just to be clear, are you saying that the despairing student that Mason described was unable to understand programming because they weren't truly interested?

Coding doesn’t require an unusual intellectual aptitude like that sort of mathematics. I see it as a vocation similar to auto mechanics, electricians, or sewing professionals: a specialization not for everyone but not limited to a set of people with high intellectual aptitude.

Like many vocations, the underlying principles of coding are simple (organizing and changing data) but the main barrier to entry is the professional jargon. Math has the jargon problem too, but the abstractions involved present barriers to understanding in themselves.