http://p.einarsen.no/accelerate-your-perl-learning-2-from-novice-to-adept/ Thu, 14 Jul 2011 22:53:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 http://p.einarsen.no/accelerate-your-perl-learning-2-from-novice-to-adept/comment-page-1/#comment-1168 Trevor Tue, 02 Mar 2010 08:12:02 +0000 http://p.einarsen.no/?p=324#comment-1168 I would say that studying the documentation is one way to get to the next level, but only if your brain is wired that way that you can absorb vast quantities of data. When I learn a new computer language I first read half a book on the language, play around to make sure I am able to reproduce the grammar well enough to get it to work, and then use Google and assume that something probably exists that does the kind of think I want to do. This may produce the answer I need, or it may not and in which case I either learn why not or find no answer. If I discover why something does not work, I rework my concept of the language, while if I find no answer I am probably attempting something new and this may either be a good or bad thing, it might lead to success or having to find another concept to deal with whatever I am attempting to do. The point is that I am not a specialist in a single subject, my skills are not high craft in programming, but I do use programming well enough to demonstrate where a design should be going. Therefore, is a good programmer one with excellent code skills or one with excellent code conceptual design skills? Are all programmers able to deploy both skill types equally well, and do they need to? My point is that we might find that the code-skill programmer will progress successfully through the documentation, while the conceptual design programmer may use it as little more than a refined lucky dip. For the latter, a good resource may be nothing more than a piece of information that opens a doorway, and this information might come from anywhere, any field, any discipline. I would say that studying the documentation is one way to get to the next level, but only if your brain is wired that way that you can absorb vast quantities of data. When I learn a new computer language I first read half a book on the language, play around to make sure I am able to reproduce the grammar well enough to get it to work, and then use Google and assume that something probably exists that does the kind of think I want to do. This may produce the answer I need, or it may not and in which case I either learn why not or find no answer. If I discover why something does not work, I rework my concept of the language, while if I find no answer I am probably attempting something new and this may either be a good or bad thing, it might lead to success or having to find another concept to deal with whatever I am attempting to do.
The point is that I am not a specialist in a single subject, my skills are not high craft in programming, but I do use programming well enough to demonstrate where a design should be going. Therefore, is a good programmer one with excellent code skills or one with excellent code conceptual design skills? Are all programmers able to deploy both skill types equally well, and do they need to?
My point is that we might find that the code-skill programmer will progress successfully through the documentation, while the conceptual design programmer may use it as little more than a refined lucky dip. For the latter, a good resource may be nothing more than a piece of information that opens a doorway, and this information might come from anywhere, any field, any discipline.

]]>