I came across this article in the course of my day and was prepared to >dismiss it as ill-informed hype from some journalist.
Instead, it is well considered and well-written by someone who has
actual knowledge of what he is talking about.
https://readwrite.com/2021/11/22/what-the-future-of-programming-languages-looks-like/
In article <j07vidFahfkU1@mid.individual.net>,
pete dashwood <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote:
I came across this article in the course of my day and was prepared to
dismiss it as ill-informed hype from some journalist.
Instead, it is well considered and well-written by someone who has
actual knowledge of what he is talking about.
https://readwrite.com/2021/11/22/what-the-future-of-programming-languages-looks-like/
From the abovegiven URL:
--begin quoted text:
The Role of Low-Code and No-Code Programming
We should also talk about the future possibilities of low-code and no-code programming. As the names suggest, these types of programming try to limit
or completely eliminate the need for personal programming input. Most
people are so devoid of technical knowledge they have trouble remembering
and securing a simple password, so these types of applications have tremendous potential to become popular.
--end quoted text
... and this caused me to ponder. I've seen articles and advertisements
for Low-Code and No-Code solutions and the words of my first COBOL
instructor resounded across the decades:
'The most important part about learning computer programming is NOT
learning how to program computers, it is learning to approach a problem in
a logical fashion: what are we looking for? Is it here? If it isn't,
what should we do? If it is, how do we know if it's any good? ... and so on.'
So... if 'most people... have trouble remembering and securing a simple password' how can one reasonably conclude that 'most people should be encouraged to treat the company's data as each one of them sees fit'?
(the discussion about how 'remembering' is a function of 'memory' and how 'logicking' is a function of 'something else' may be left for another
time)
In article <j07vidFahfkU1@mid.individual.net>,
pete dashwood <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote:
I came across this article in the course of my day and was prepared
to dismiss it as ill-informed hype from some journalist.
Instead, it is well considered and well-written by someone who has
actual knowledge of what he is talking about.
https://readwrite.com/2021/11/22/what-the-future-of-programming-langu
ages-looks-like/
From the abovegiven URL:
--begin quoted text:
The Role of Low-Code and No-Code Programming
We should also talk about the future possibilities of low-code and
no-code programming. As the names suggest, these types of programming
try to limit or completely eliminate the need for personal programming input. Most people are so devoid of technical knowledge they have
trouble remembering and securing a simple password, so these types of applications have tremendous potential to become popular.
--end quoted text
.... and this caused me to ponder. I've seen articles and
advertisements for Low-Code and No-Code solutions and the words of my
first COBOL instructor resounded across the decades:
'The most important part about learning computer programming is NOT
learning how to program computers, it is learning to approach a
problem in a logical fashion: what are we looking for? Is it here?
If it isn't, what should we do? If it is, how do we know if it's any
good? ... and so on.'
So... if 'most people... have trouble remembering and securing a
simple password' how can one reasonably conclude that 'most people
should be encouraged to treat the company's data as each one of them
sees fit'?
(the discussion about how 'remembering' is a function of 'memory' and
how 'logicking' is a function of 'something else' may be left for
another time)
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 296 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 76:38:50 |
Calls: | 6,657 |
Calls today: | 3 |
Files: | 12,203 |
Messages: | 5,332,734 |
Posted today: | 1 |