Yes, but the author was a really "Real Programmer" :-)
Many of that thing he mentioned was familiar to me, even I made programs in Fortran, Assembly, used Teco, and so on. But my main programming language was C and the hated Pascal :-)
Yes, but the author was a really "Real Programmer" :-)
Many of that thing he mentioned was familiar to me, even I made programs in Fortran, Assembly, used Teco, and so on. But my main programming language was C and the hated Pascal :-)
My path went from GWBasic, QBasic, Perl, Turbo Pascal, Delphi, Assembler, PHP to what I write now: C#. Never had real touch with full functional languages, though functional aspects also went into imperative languages too (including C#). So in the sense of this article I'm probably a quiche eater 😂
Anyhow, I found out really fast that it's a big advantage if the software you're writing is understandable by more people than just the original writer. And this means it should be structured, well commented, shouldn't contain spaghetti code and site long methods/functions or anything that would come as a surprise to someone who didn't write the code.
This probably also means you, as a programmer, are rather replaceable than the "real programmer". But it makes the software far better maintainable and extendable than what is described in that text.