Programming

17351 readers

298 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

snowe@programming.dev

Ategon@programming.dev

MaungaHikoi@lemmy.nz

Mathematicians and software (lemmy.world)

submitted 10 months ago by 3h5Hne7t1K@lemmy.world to c/programming@programming.dev

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

It is often echoed that mathematicians make excellent software engineers, and that their logic-adjacent work will translate efficiently into coding and designing.

I have found this to be almost universally untrue. I might even say the inverse is true.

While I and many of my peers have capacity to navigate the mathematical world, it certainly is not what sets us (at least me) apart when designing clever algorithms and software tricks.

Point being: I dont think the property/trait that makes good programmers is mathematical literacy.

I would love to hear what others experience is regarding this.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I do think so, yes.

For one, not everyone needs to be an absolute expert. You do want some person with expert knowledge to sanity check what you're doing, but ultimately you'll have engineers, programmers etc. that are tasked with putting a formula into reality. If they can intuitively read formulas and more easily read up on the surrounding context, that helps a lot.

In that sense, I may also be very programmer-biased in how I read papers, but generally I prefer to look at a given formula and then read up on why it is formulated like that. Maybe I also have some form of ADS, but for the life of me, I cannot linearly read a paper front to back. And I'm not alone in that.

From computer science papers / academic texts, I know that this method of reading works perfectly fine. But if I try to delve into any other fields, it's always a matter of first decoding the formula before I can try to figure out what it means.

Ultimately, it just feels like unnecessary hindrance of understanding, even if theoretically you're just hindering those who supposedly wouldn't understand anyways.

[–] jasory@programming.dev 2 points 10 months ago

"From computer science papers/academic texts I know this method of reading works perfectly"

This is almost certainly due to pure familiarity. CS papers are just as indecipherable to unfamiliar persons. Possibly even more since things like complexity are heavily used, without any explanation of what it is. Data structures are another common one that the vast majority of non-CS people would not understand when referenced.

I know because this is exactly how I felt coming from an intermediate mathematics background.