I don’t program, at best I script and I’ve made a reasonable career of this when called for by any of my jobs. Â This Rube Goldberg-esque methodology is not helpful when learning to program with a capital “p”. Â “Programming” seems to involve things like having “data flows” and in some case interaction with these dreaded “objects” I have heard so much about. Â Whenever I create a new class I feel like I have a new structure that has to be bargained with, that is holding my data-children hostage that only through an intricate set of calls and handshakes may I actually see them. Â This is the way “programmers” do things, and people far smarter than I have ordained this the way of the world.
I created my first “Hello, World” program in my target framework and have gone so far as to change both the point size and font of the text. Â This isn’t even crawling, this isn’t even breathing. Â This is the programming equivalent of the moment of silence where the baby is alive but has yet to be slapped intoÂ cognizancesÂ by the doctor. Â Then the pain begins, and I get to become some sort of journeyman bit-wielder who will spend the next years hating pound signs and import calls but will miss them (dearly) when removed from that element. Â I never felt this way about chemistry, as I considered each compound, extract, and experiment to be a friend. Â The calcified laws of nature were perfectly content to merely repeat their one line of “a 10Â°C translates to a doubling of the rate of reaction” until you realized this truth and its manifold implications. Â Programming has yet to introduce me to those friends with their quirks (crystallized iodine compounds make wonderful party tricks) and qualities (acetylene and chlorine react as gases to produce a color that I can only describe as “bright”) and I wonder if this happens in programming. Â If it does not, I will petition for a change to the second word in “computer science”.