The Great War

[wtd]

One of the great divides in programming is whether to approach learning to program as a practical exercise. You have a problem, and you want to solve it, so you learn a programming language to help you solve it, and when you're done, then that's it.

Or do you approach learning to program as an opportunity to hone problem-solving skills. Do you learn generally about things like data structures and program organization? Do you learn a language that makes it easy to explore topics like these, even if it may not be the most practical for actually turning around and solving a specific problem?

[[Gandalf]]

I'm not sure what to vote for, but in my opinion this, like most other things, is relative. Whichever approach you use should depend on what level of education the learner is at, what subjects they excel in, and their general interests / interest in programming.

I'd say in a school environment things like data structures are important as creating good code is (hopefully) emphasized. If someone were learning programming as a hobby, for fun, they could take the more practical approach and learn something like graphics functions early on. That is not to say that someone who is learning programming as a hobby can't/shouldn't learn to create "good" code as well, just have different priorities.

[wtd]

I think what you're describing naturally evolves. Those without some direction from someone like a teacher just don't know how to learn about programming as an art.

I think there is also an unfortunate but natural tendency to develop pride in one's work when approaching programming from a hobbyist standpoint. Then suggestions of ways to improve one's skills become challenges, and are rebuked rather than embraced.

Taking all of that into account... I've noticed that schools themselves seem to be increasingly embracing the view expressed by the first option in the poll.

[Tony]

I've been told that Universities focus on concepts and theories. Algorythms, Data Structures, etc.

But Colleges take a more "code to make this happen" practical approach.

I'm not sure how true this is as I haven't been to a College.

[Cervantes]

I prefer to learn for the sake of learning. Practical applications of that knowledge will fall out, in turn.

For a while I was thinking of going into Pure Math.

[Martin]

Cervantes wrote:

I prefer to learn for the sake of learning. Practical applications of that knowledge will fall out, in turn.

For a while I was thinking of going into Pure Math.

Q: Why did the Pure Math graduate call in sick to work?
A: Trick question. Pure math graduates don't have jobs.


As for your question wtd, I tend to do both. On one hand, I do enjoy learning, and have no problem doing so purely for intellectual sake. On the other hand, if I see no benefit to learning something (even if that benefit is a long time from now) I have a hard time staying motivated.

For balance, however, I think that you need both. The scholar who's never experienced the ins and outs of writting a large program will be at a disadvantage, although probably not as much so as the hands-on developer who never learnt that there were better ways to sort than the bubble sort.

[bugzpodder]

I would do neither. I'd just pick a technology, and learn it.
Pick C++, learn it.
Pick XML, learn it.
Pick SQL, learn it.
etc

if you have a problem, try the technology at hand. if it doesnt work, then try to find something that works.