Hacker News Reader

Comment by rocgf | Hacker News Reader

I have a slightly cynical view about this sort of thing, and assume that most might have some counter-arguments for why my cynicism is misguided.

I get that the point of the post is to encourage others, but proclaiming to have "learned how to code" feels misleading because there is no real finish line for it. This is an open-ended skill, there is no such thing as being done with it, same with most other skills. Maybe you can claim that you self-learned how to do a Rubik's cube, but I have been learning how to code for 15 years and with each day I feel like there's so much more that I don't know.

View on HN

There's a level above which you can be gainfully employed though.

In my private projects I use cutting-edge frameworks, write tests (which actually test at that), solve algorithmic problems and learn new languages.

None of this takes place at work and still I get paid - mostly because what I'm doing for a living is akin to brick laying, since it was optimised for predictable outcomes(hilariously enough having tested code is not part of this optimisation - hiring a QA team once the budget for that is approved is, though).

This is basically the paradox of the heap. Adding one grain of sand doesn't turn a non-heap into a heap of sand, so there's no point at which you've added enough sand for there to be a heap. Yet if you add enough sand, you clearly have a heap at some point. You can always add more sand and make a bigger heap, but that doesn't negate the fact that you have a heap.

The fact that you can't clearly delineate the point where you've learned to code doesn't mean that can't have learned how to code, and the fact that you can get better at coding doesn't mean you haven't learned to code yet.

There is a point where a person can move from honestly describing their capability as "I don't know how to implement an application" up to "I can implement an application". Sure, learning never ends, but reaching this first hurdle is the thing we are discussing here, I think.

As someone else remarked here, if you are good enough to become employed, this would in my opinion statuate one kind of level (among many possible) describing something reasonable final (I agree of course, after this you will learn a lot more).

The other point is, life is not finished with doing coding. While I'm still a not too bad programmer, in particular my C++ abilities are not on par with my former ones. Simply, because I nowadays write most things in Python, wear other hats than pure programming etc., but I certainly can say I learned to code.

You are right! But what is that level when you say that you are a coder now? A software developer? When you graduate from a bootcamp?

When someone hires you? Maybe when someone pays you for an app you built?

For me it was the latter..

Knowing how to code means you're able to go from an idea to working implementation in a reasonable amount of time.

What is "an idea"? Any idea? On any programming field? Am I not a coder because I don't know how to make a osx app? And what is a reasonable amount of time? After all, I can make an osx app, taking way longer than someone who has experience making osx apps, but waaaay faster than someone who doesn't know anything about programming. Maybe that's enough? Ah but, I know how to make a http rest api in a fraction of time. So maybe that is enough to be a coder? So the osx app isn't needed after all? So maybe it's any idea? But how about if it's a trivial idea, like something I can make using excel? Is that still coding? Or only if I use advanced excel scripting, but not if I just use basic formulas? And what is "working implementation"? Something that people pay you for? Something that has any users besides you? Or something that brings value to at least one person, even if that person is yourself?

I think if you wanted to make an OS X app you could probably figure it out while someone who doesn't know how to program would not even know how to begin.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com