I get the point of this post, even if it seems a bit of a tangent from the what the author is saying, but
>>in case you think you have spent 10 years learning all the secret recipes in computer science books but are not good in other areas. You are no better than the 'Learn programming in 30 days guy'.
and
>>Your regular data structure and algorithm sauce is probably 1% of what is required
is just false. Sure, studying classical CS concepts is not all there is to software development and success in the software development industry, but your comment largely renders advanced degrees, like PhDs, about as useful as some poorly written Java book with regard to success as a software engineer.
>>but your comment largely renders advanced degrees, like PhDs, about as useful as some poorly written Java book with regard to success as a software engineer.
I am not saying that at all. All I'm saying is, as programmers we tend to assume knowledge of text books and programming is all that is needed to win. And that if you have it, that is all there is that it takes to win.
This is largely untrue. I have seen that this is hardly what it takes.
It's important to learn the fundamental and concepts, but if you are bad at everything else. In the the practical scenario you and the 12 weeks programming guy will both sail in the same boat. You will be bad at one set of things, and he will be bad at the other.
Textbook-type knowledge of programming (and more specifically, data structures and algorithms) are not all that's required to be successful in this industry, but it's sure a hell of a lot more important than 1% of the whole puzzle.
I can't say much about 12-weeks-programmer guy, but if the only skill that 12-weeks-programmer guy has is the programming skills he's obtained in those 12 weeks and the only skills 10-years-of-pounding-CS-books guy has are the skills he's obtained from those books, I'm going to pick the guys that's been reading all about automata theory to be more successful.
Not that I'm saying that the author is destined to be unsuccessful. I'm just trying to point out that classical CS skills are more important than you're portraying.
>>in case you think you have spent 10 years learning all the secret recipes in computer science books but are not good in other areas. You are no better than the 'Learn programming in 30 days guy'.
and
>>Your regular data structure and algorithm sauce is probably 1% of what is required
is just false. Sure, studying classical CS concepts is not all there is to software development and success in the software development industry, but your comment largely renders advanced degrees, like PhDs, about as useful as some poorly written Java book with regard to success as a software engineer.