Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

8
  • 6
    Nah, angry birds is probably like 2 or 3 keywords repeated ad nauseum with funny photographs of birds. Yep. It's a database for ornithologists right? Commented Aug 23, 2013 at 17:24
  • Well, but in certain way Peter Norving's point refer to the fact of "mastering" not knowing in a superficial way (that is the central point of his article) the programming language. In fact, Peter and Jeff Atwood refers to be a "master". As the same way you describe Jeff Atwood posture I describe that Peter Norving is saying that being an excellent programmer requires a lot of coding (with the implicit learning topics) and practice. Commented Aug 24, 2013 at 6:08
  • 2
    @Wronski: Ah, you're back, I see! Nice to see you again. While you were away, we were discussing your question, closing it, and reopening it. Anyway, so what are you saying, exactly? Peter Norving's point is that you can't be a master in 24 hours, or even 21 days. Jeff Atwood's point is that you can't be a master by only writing code. They are both right. Commented Aug 24, 2013 at 6:12
  • 1
    @Wronski: Masters are both good coders and good engineers. Commented Aug 24, 2013 at 6:22
  • 3
    @RobertHarvey After 11 years later I totally understand the point, and now is ingrained in me! Thanks Commented Feb 22 at 5:50