• halloween_spookster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Myth: software engineers replicate value similar to a factory worker making the same item over and over

    Truth: software engineers are closer to artists than factory workers IMO. We find and create new value, not replicate existing value

  • stoly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Honestly? The people who say “learn to code” as the solution to getting a better job. Only some people can do this.

    Also the idea that tech “just works”. Have had freshly-minted CS/info types suddenly realize why the phrase “back away slowly” exists.

  • pinchcramp@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    That programming as a career means you’re going to spend writing nice, clean code 80% of the time.

    It’s rather debugging code or tooling problems 50% of the time, talking to other people (whether necessary or not) about 35% of the time and the rest may be spent on actually spending time doing the thing you actually enjoy.

    I may be exaggerating, but only a little.

  • Cyclohexane@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Requiring a candidate to know a specific programming language is stupid. Nearly all of the commonly used languages in industry are similar.

    It’s maybe more valuable to require knowledge in a specific framework, where knowledge is less transferrable between popular frameworks. Nonetheless, I personally rather hire an engineer that solves problems and learns flexibly rather than one that happens to know the right tech.

    • onlinepersona@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s not a black and white issue. “Jack of all trades, master of none” vs “expert of one”. Both have their place and I think it’s better to have a mix than just one or the other.

      I’ve seen python newcomers writing code as if they were writing in another language. They don’t know about dataclasses, operator overrides, __init__ vs __new__, metaclasses, __init__.py vs __main__.py, @property, match, the walrus operator, or assignments, or the common pitfalls of python like mutable defaults, type hints, and a bunch of other things.
      Knowing a language in-depth helps write DRY code, avoiding common pitfalls, handling things better like debugging, profiling, and other tooling, and avoiding pitfalls of the language, which newcomers have to first learn, regardless of how their experience with other languages.

      A lot of stuff is transferable, for sure, but every language uses different idioms, covers different paradigms, and so on. It’s good to have at least one expert on the term to teach others, and to have people flexible enough to switch of willing to learn. Having only experts can mean a static team unwilling to experiment or use better programming languages or technologies. Having only beginners or mediors of a language can produce functional, but sub-optimal code. YMMV

      CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

    • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’d say this is pretty dependent on the language. For example, with C++, you need to micromanage (or at least benefit from micromanaging) a lot of things that you can get away without knowing about at all with other languages. That stuff takes time to pick up if you’re self-teaching as you can write stuff that looks like it works without knowing its half as fast as it could be because you aren’t making use of move semantics, and if a colleague is teaching you, then that’s time they’re not spending directly doing their own work. On the other hand, someone with Typescript experience could write pretty decent Javascript from the get-go.

      • CodeMonkey@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        C++ is unique in that it is wildly dominant in its niche. I am sure that any developer who has worked with another object oriented, manually memory managed, systems programming language (are there any other popular ones out there?) should have no trouble picking up C++.

  • Addv4@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    That if you know how to code, you understand how computers work and understand really complicated math concepts.

  • Dr. Wesker@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    That you can just go to a bootcamp, and be good at or naturally suited for it.

    That you can go to college and get a degree, and be good at or naturally suited for it.

      • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        But programming is definitely more open to the idea of people just showing up and claiming to know stuff. You wouldn’t trust Steve to build a bridge just because he watched a bunch of engineering videos on YouTube.

  • Cyclohexane@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Some programmers are software engineers. They solve problems, sometimes problems with great ambiguity or non-straightforward solutions.

    And some programmers are… code technicians? They understand and write code, but their job seldom involves problem solving. Often times, they’re asked to code an already solved problem, or mostly solved.

    This is not a diss. I was in the second camp for a while. But it hurts your career to stay in that. So be careful.