To get started, yes.
To quickly acquire a new language, yes.
To make you a competent programmer, no.
If you’re mixing it with a powerful curiosity and some good old fashioned stubbornness, you’ll get a lot out of it. But you’re going to need to spend time building on a significant project to find out all the places you still have gaps.
The same is true of a CS degree too, imo.
CS just gives you a grounding in theory
really, it's an abuse of language to call CS "applied science" when most of the course is just theory
writing applications is applied science
I had a programming teacher that demanded that all the computers in the room be turned off when he was giving his lecture.
the whole concept is absurd
boot camp is a military procedure for induction, they don't send the officers to it, they go study for a few years at a kind of university, and then they go back to the military camp and design things for the soldiers to do, whatever the deployment is whether it's an attack or a defense scenario
the implication of boot camp is that you are definitely not going to be taught any kind of architectural or production/procedural information, just familiarised with the tactics of a particular technology
making use of that requires architects and project management, and in my opinion, these two categories of tech workers are utterly unqualified
this is engineering
you don't really learn anything in engineering except the tactics (measurements and facts about materials) you have to go through the process of building to understand the minds of the architects and project managers, and ultimately, for most projects, the developers themselves, writing teh code, have to be reasonably competent at PM and architecture
in my career so far as a programmer i have not met one PM or architect who could second guess what i already knew and that's pretty sad because i'm shit at those things
but i'm obviously not much worse either
