How to Learn to Code in 2026
-
How to Learn to Code in 2026
Link to videoSo, fellow dinosaurs who have been coding since COBOL was cool^, how does this make you feel?
***^***
click to show -
I just watched a couple minutes but I liked the comment that paranoia makes a good engineer.
I’ve been obsolete as a coder for far too long to worry about it.
"You cannot subsidize irresponsibility and expect people to become more responsible." — Thomas Sowell
-
Coding with LLMs works amazingly well, I love it.
But the one thing I'm not so certain about: LLMs are good at creating apps that use and combine the zoo of abstractions (libraries and frameworks etc) out there.
What remains to be seen is whether LLMs will be good at abstracting. Could they ever come up with a good design of a collections library, for instance, if such libraries weren't part of their learning data? Could they recognize patterns such as structural recursion over an algebraic data type and come up with the abstraction of folds/catamorphisms? That's not so obvious.
-
I just watched a couple minutes but I liked the comment that paranoia makes a good engineer.
I’ve been obsolete as a coder for far too long to worry about it.
-
Coding with LLMs works amazingly well, I love it.
But the one thing I'm not so certain about: LLMs are good at creating apps that use and combine the zoo of abstractions (libraries and frameworks etc) out there.
What remains to be seen is whether LLMs will be good at abstracting. Could they ever come up with a good design of a collections library, for instance, if such libraries weren't part of their learning data? Could they recognize patterns such as structural recursion over an algebraic data type and come up with the abstraction of folds/catamorphisms? That's not so obvious.
Coding with LLMs works amazingly well, I love it.
But the one thing I'm not so certain about: LLMs are good at creating apps that use and combine the zoo of abstractions (libraries and frameworks etc) out there.
What remains to be seen is whether LLMs will be good at abstracting. Could they ever come up with a good design of a collections library, for instance, if such libraries weren't part of their learning data? Could they recognize patterns such as structural recursion over an algebraic data type and come up with the abstraction of folds/catamorphisms? That's not so obvious.
If a human can describe the logic in natural language then the LLM can code it. It seems you’re talking about the creative thinking behind generating abstractions but that’s not the same thing as generating code from well specified natural language. No matter how abstract the library, if a human can describe it unambiguously then an LLM can code it. If a human can code something then an LLM can too. Because if a human can code something then they can describe it.
-
Regarding the video, her list of things the human needs to know includes nothing you can’t ask an AI about. I’m convinced personally that the nuts and bolts of coding in high level languages is as dead as the nuts and bolts of coding in machine language. Or at least it will be in the near future.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login