Georg WeissenbacherMar 5
@krismicinski @shriramk @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek we have been claiming for decades that we are not just educating coding monkeys, so it shouldn't really matter that LLMs can now do all the coding. As far as I see it, it's still necessary to identify and clearly formulate verifiable requirements and specifications, come up with a modular design, and verify the whole thing, because I still believe the ultimate responsibilty lies with the developer. So students still need to understand the fundamentals. But yes, it has become much harder to check *at scale* whether they actually grasped them.
Show threadShriram KrishnamurthiMar 6

@GeorgWeissenbacher @[email protected] @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek
Yes to most of that. I think it's not that hard to assess if that is what people were always assessing that.

I actually disagree w/ your opening comment. Most intro CS educators will say (and have said), "I don't teach programming, I teach *problem solving*" (whatever the fuck that is). My response is, "great, this should be your liberation! Programming got easy, what are your «problem solving» ideas?"

Show threadTony Garnock-JonesMar 6
@shriramk @GeorgWeissenbacher @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek ... did programming get easy? Can one be said to be programming if one asks someone else (or an LLM) to write a program for you? Or is some other kind of (not- or not-quite-programming) interaction going on?
Show threadShriram KrishnamurthiMar 6
@tonyg @GeorgWeissenbacher @[email protected] @jfdm @csgordon @lindsey @jeremysiek
I very much think of what I'm doing with Claude Code as a kind of programming — indeed, the kind of programming I always wished I could do! But if it makes you happier to use a different term for it (not "vibecoding", that has too many specific connotations and is definitely not how *I'm* doing things), and it's *useful* to have that other term…that's fine by me. I guess my slogan is: "Philosophy…but not too much".
Show threadLindsey KuperMar 6
@shriramk @tonyg @GeorgWeissenbacher @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @jeremysiek This comment made me realize something about myself: this is *not* a kind of programming I always wished I could do. I really only like programming because I like manipulating formal systems. That might explain a lot about why this kind of programming doesn't appeal to me, aside from all the bad externalities.
Show threadShriram KrishnamurthiMar 6
@lindsey @tonyg @GeorgWeissenbacher @[email protected] @jfdm @csgordon @jeremysiek
One thing I've learned over the past few months is that there seem to be two kinds of "programmers" even in the very rarified space of "profs with a PhD in PL/FM/…": those who really like code and those are indifferent to it in light of other aspirations. Until now we had no way of telling ourselves apart. Now we do. It's been really interesting, revealing, and fun to see this split.
Show threadandrew blinn

there are maybe a lot of different dimensions here i think. personally one of the main reasons i do a lot of programming is motivated by dislike for how programming feels to me now versus i i feel it could feel, and my desire to make systems which feel different. my main personal interest is in ways of interacting with computing that are more spatial and tangible, which led to me initially disliking chat-based approaches, which seem to be taking me farther away from the goal state.

i've basically since done a 180 on this as the combination of increased model capabilities and refining my processes have led to a point that, despite not being what i want at an immediate level, the 'new programming' feels like a more happy intermediate to me than the old way of doing things. it seems to allow me to interact with code at a bit closer to the conceptual level i wanted to, even if the cost is a layer of intermediation that feels very different than i imagined. it still feels very much like a k step forward m steps back situation when k and m are very rapidly in flux, even as the ratio has been trending mostly positive.

@shriramk @lindsey @tonyg @GeorgWeissenbacher @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @jeremysiek

Mar 6 at 10:01pmWeb
Show threadShriram KrishnamurthiMar 6
@disconcision @lindsey @tonyg @GeorgWeissenbacher @[email protected] @jfdm @csgordon @jeremysiek
Personally, I'm excited that I can use this weak-ass text interface to try to build the medium I wish I had!
Show threadandrew blinnMar 6
@shriramk @lindsey @tonyg @GeorgWeissenbacher @krismicinski @jfdm @csgordon @jeremysiek i'll admit that recent developments have given me pause about whether structured editing qua structured editing is worth pursuing, even as my experiments in this space have been significantly accelerated. but then i remember that structured editing was already utterly quixotic