
Knuth: Computer Programming as an Art - revorad
http://www.paulgraham.com/knuth.html
======
cool-RR
When I see articles like this that show a deep understanding on the present
state and the future of programming, it makes me sad.

Because if these kinds of ideas were articulated 35 years ago, I'd expect that
by now we would have progressed much more.

~~~
mscarborough
We might think. It's unfortunate that Knuth is not more widely read or
understood. He's a great writer, it shows in his writing and coding work.

I liked his quotes in 'Coders at Work' where he said he didn't expect anyone
to read his books cover-to-cover, and he writes such detailed books in part to
avoid forgetting stuff.

------
gord
It would be nice if psychologists would be honest and introspective enough to
call their field an Art... at least until the appearance of a Hari Seldon.

~~~
rfreytag
The Hari Seldon of psychology is John Gottman: <http://tinyurl.com/y9952j5>

~~~
jmatt
<http://tinyurl.com/y9952j5>

->

[http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=gottman&...](http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=gottman&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv#)

------
jackfoxy
Having slogged through the 3 volumes of the 3rd Edition of TAOCP, I came away
with 2 impressions: 1) How did Knuth work art into the title? 2)
Disappointment that he took so long coming out with subsequent volumes. So
long, that I no longer care about reading the subsequent volumes.

~~~
michael_dorfman
That's too bad, since there's some great stuff in Volume 4. In fact, it's my
favorite volume in the series (so far.)

~~~
jackfoxy
Watched his Christmas tree lecture, and he said the hardbound vol. 4 (not the
facsile) will be out in 2010. I consider that the true vol.4...only, what, 5
or 6 years later than he originally proposed.

------
allenbrunson
"When I'm sitting in an audience listening to a long lecture, my attention
usually starts to wane at about this point in the hour. So I wonder, are you
getting a little tired of my harangue about 'science' and 'art'?"

yes. i'd already started skimming several pages earlier.

i don't have a problem with reading texts of any length, so long as they are
telling me something interesting. belaboring an insignificant point for five
or six pages does not fall into that category.

i know knuth is a smart guy and all, but man, this reminds me of why i so
rarely read him.

------
10ren
Is mathematics (theorem proving) an art?

~~~
fburnaby
I like to think of it as Hofstadter suggests; theorem proving is mechanical,
but there is a very beautiful art in selection of the axioms.

~~~
nearestneighbor
In some idealized form of math, proving theorems is indeed mechanical, but the
branching factor is extremely high.

------
brooksbp
"The moral of this story, it seems to me, is that we should make use of the
idea of limited resources in our own education. We can all benefit by doing
occasional "toy" programs, when artificial restrictions are set up, so that we
are forced to push our abilities to the limit. We shouldn't live in the lap of
luxury all the time, since that tends to make us lethargic. The art of
tackling miniproblems with all our energy will sharpen our talents for the
real problems, and the experience will help us to get more pleasure from our
accomplishments on less restricted equipment."

------
fmw
Computer programming is neither science or art, but can be used for both. It
is a form of expression. This article seems to take root in an urge to justify
computer programming as a serious endeavor in a time where it was still new in
the world of academia. In a way, this whole debate is about identity and self
image (just like taking idolization of the hacker subculture to extreme
lengths).

------
scorxn
I think defining an artform is populist. Therefore, you have to start
somewhere. The emergence of "Programming Appreciation" courses would be a
tipping point.

~~~
imd
Defining an artform is supporting the rights and power of the people in their
struggle against the privileged elite? That's the only definition of populist
(as adj.) I can find; do you mean that?

~~~
nagrom
I think what is meant is that the artist cannot really define what he does as
an art. There must be popular appreciation of the art to allow it to be
defined as art, i.e. you cannot really have an artform until people who do not
practice it, appreciate it.

When people who are not computer programmers can appreciate the art of
computer programming, then you can define it as an art, not before.

I think of programming as something similar to carpentry. A craft capable of
producing useful things that can also be appreciated as works of skill in
their own right, and must be practiced regularly.

------
joe_the_user
Hmm,

Art is lovely and creative and all. But if "flying a plane to the cleveland"
was "an art, not a science", the passengers might be afraid to get on the
plane.

Some parts of programming need have a certain standardization. I guess I'm
still feeling burnt by "creative" scientific programmers who want their entire
inspiration to exist entirely in matlab unavailable to any grubby practical
hands. The quote Knuth criticizes seems like a reaction to schemes of this
sort and so I have a bit of sympathy.

