The Importance of Reading as a Software Engineer | Hacker News Reader

The Importance of Reading as a Software Engineer

isaacjordan.me

48 pointsSheepzez26 comments

Open articleView on HN

I'm sorry, but I really don't know why this is front-page hacker news. Is this somebody famous or something?

- Starts out by linking to somebody's book

- States its thesis "Engineers should read"

- It then reasons out that famous people advocate books, and then speculates this is related to their success [causal?]

- Proposes which book one reads doesn't matter

- Charges the reader to read the book over 2 weeks

- Speculates that reading helps spot analogies to current life situations.

- Repeats thesis statement.

Hey, no I'm not famous in any way - just a lowly undergrad looking to get some views and feedback on my blog posts (I only recently started).

Your points are definitely fair, and I agree that the post could be better thought out and structured to give a more coherent argument. Thanks for the feedback.

Just a nitpick, but you can't go around and say "successful people tend to read a lot of books, but anyway, that's probably just a correlation, not causal" and then proceed to make the argument that people should read books because it'll make them smarter. That's the exact opposite of the argument you just made. If you believe that a correlation represents a cause-effect relationship, just say so.

I was really just trying to show the point without saying "reading books will make you smarter/successful", but more to say that you may find it harder to be successful if you don't read.

Logic tells us those two statements are equivalent.

p = "reading books"

q = "success"

p => q is equivalent to ~q => ~p

Clearly OP needs to read more books.

This is true but irrelevant.

It may well be that reading doesn't make you successful, but not-reading makes you not-successful.

It's like playing the lottery doesn't make you win, but not-playing makes you not-win.

One hypothesis: reading is a concentration-building activity. One of the greatest determinants of success as a software engineer is your ability to attain and maintain concentration. If this is a habit for you, you're going to be a better programmer.

Contrast with the more typical leisure activity (of which I am totally guilty): the Skinner boxes of HN, Reddit, Facebook, and to some extent Netflix.

I actually really like this hypothesis. There is definitely a distinction between long-form content and short-form content, and programming certainly lies in the former.

That's not to say that short-form content doesn't have its place, I'm pretty sure I would learn less if I didn't browse Reddit or HN during lunchtime, and for some reason I feel like reading a book wouldn't fit in that 15 - 30 minute period. But it's still a period I can put to use.

I like the observation about the importance of concentration.

In addition to reading, I've noticed that studying mathematics is an opportunity to practice (or build) the ability to focus on frustratingly difficult material that requires a high attention to detail.

People talk a lot about programming being similar to math, programming ability being similar to mathematics ability. I've always been a shitty symbol-pusher and a reasonable programmer, so I thought this was a bunch of bullshit. Then I actually took a post-calculus math course (Intro to Analysis and Linear Algebra). The material was irrelevant but the cognitive muscles exercised were very similar.

dual n-back is questionable in terms of improving iq / working memory, but if you want to try something much more concentration intensive than possibly anything else, give it a shot

brainworkshop seems to be the most popular tool

>Many view reading as a waste of valuable time

Who thinks that?

Yeah what the hell? Anybody who thinks that gets an idiot stamp from me on the head.

Thank you. I think that. In fact I know several people who holds that point of view.

People that value reading differently than you?

I think reading book about a programming language, or an accessible technology is indeed a waste of time (and a bit of money). Why not just follow a good online tutorial and try things straight up?

With hands-on from the start, you won't comprehend all the stuff early on, no doubt. But those holes in your understanding of the concept are really useful because it makes you more motivated to fill them, and feel rewarded when you finally get it.

Also, I noticed some sort of book-hoarding learning fallacy between people I know - when somebody wants to learn a technology, he/she sees ordering an Oreilly book on the topic as a valid part of the learning effort. As if the idea would be "I'll get a book, read it, ???, become a guru". Usually the person doesn't even get to read it (no time after when it's delivered; new obsession; ...). And even if, reading one book won't make you even a reasonable <whatever> programmer. You'd just make better use of the time following a good tutorial, and then perhaps hacking in a FOSS project.

> ...he/she sees ordering an Oreilly book on the topic as a valid part of the learning effort.

It's easy enough to see the difference between ordering a book and reading it.

Regardless, in response to your overall point, some people can actually learn a great deal by reading a book that interests them. In addition, books can be read when working through an online tutorial is impractical -- standing on a train on your way to work, lying in bed before going to sleep, sitting on the beach or by the pool. Finally, books provide context missing from your run-of-the-mill tutorial: history and motivation for the technology (why things were built the way they were), references for further reading, etc...

I wouldn't say reading a typical book is a waste of time, but as a rule of thumb that might be worth saying. Action (e.g. practice, doing, etc..) is the gold standard. When you do actions, you read scattered tutorials, explanations of exception stacks, and multiple API documentation. If your non actions exceed 50% of your actions, then you are probably reading into one ear straight out the other. A good computer science book reading can be a real asset to someone who's looking to improve their work.

Alternative theory: the more successful you are, the more well-read you need to appear.

I've read some 25 books this year, not an awful lot but also probably above the population average. I struggle to recommend any one as a life-changer. Many were good, but I'd say the real life-changer is to read regularly rather than scavenging any single book for secrets and advice.

Very interesting point! Might that indicate that people who are less well-read are 'capped' in some fashion?

Is reading also the preserve of those who are not over-worked? If you have a good job and are not stressed about losing it (and not getting another) are you more able to find the time to read, and also to immerse yourself?

I know when I'm stressed I have a hard time focussing on say reading an interesting biography, even if achieving immersion would help me overall.

I am a pretty slow reader (when it comes to novels). I hardly ever read them when I am working, as I usully have plenty of other things I feel the need to read up on (usually new / interesting sounding tech). I used to read a lot when I was travelling / working as a river guide a number of years back. I wish I had the time to read more now.

I hate book lists when they're presented as recommendations of books we should all read, while it's transparently clear that the author has not read them. To the author: provide a list of books you have read and tell us why you recommend them, rather than linking to a list from 2008 (!) of books that you haven't read (nor has the author of that list).

Ferrari guy approves https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZKp_jFxQJc

tl;dr

Reply on news.ycombinator.com