[xquery-talk] adding comprehension to imperative languages or vice-versa
pavel.velikhov at gmail.com
Wed Jun 24 01:41:25 PDT 2015
This is the most depressing post on programming I have read in years!
> On 24 Jun 2015, at 11:28, Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 3:21 AM, Pavel Minaev <int19h at gmail.com <mailto:int19h at gmail.com>> 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.
> 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.
> talk at x-query.com
pavel.velikhov at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the talk