logoalt Hacker News

jtrntoday at 12:44 PM2 repliesview on HN

It largely depends on the person. We have several junior programmers who cannot solve a problem without FORTRAN. When the compiler can't produce efficient code, they just keep recompiling and failing. And I mean weeks to months late. Then rinse and repeat on the next routine. It used to be that they would have been forced to seek help from a senior programmer who knew the machine. Combining the teaching with a real struggle at the console is what made them better.

As it is now, they aren't being taught, and they're not learning from what the compiler is producing because they don't understand it. The emitted object code is a black box, and the compiler itself is a black box too. All they know is that running it produces something like what they asked for. They have no idea about register allocation or instruction timing, which is a fundamental concept of programming. The worst part is that automatic programming is covering up their deficiencies. They don't know what skills they lack. They don't even know octal exists, because they haven't put the effort in.

There are obviously good junior programmers who use FORTRAN judiciously and still read their core dumps. They're the ones who still interact with the senior operators and actually learn the machine. They would have been successful with a plugboard too. In my experience, the momentum is moving toward the worse type of junior the more automatic programming is adopted. Unless that changes, it will erase their value.


Replies

glouwbugtoday at 3:04 PM

This analogy only works if you’re ready to commit _only prompts_ and have those prompts do a clean “compile” of your production runtime everytime you pull.

Are you ready to do that?

show 2 replies
kibwentoday at 12:53 PM

LLMs are not even remotely comparable to compilers. This attempt at analogy is neither humorous nor insightful.

show 1 reply