2 Nov
2016
2 Nov
'16
11:59 p.m.
On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 23:29:31 +0100
Louigi Verona <louigi.verona(a)gmail.com> wrote:
To unwrap that, if I am writing a game and I need to
know how to
write a javascript random number generator, I don't need to scan
complete code of someone else's program. I need only one part - the
random number generator algorithm.
If you only need to buy carrots, why would you spend 30 minutes waling
up and down all aisles in a supermarket ?
Hopefully you will get a RNG from a library instead, isn't that the
case.
In other words, I am not arguing that looking at
someone's code is
unnecessary, I am arguing that having complete code of a program is
usually not required to learn to code.
I suspect 'learn to code' has something to do with a previous statement
about C++ being like C. Using C++ in 3 days.
It is good sometimes, perhaps
it is very useful, but this is not necessary. Many people learn to
program without being exposed to a complete open source project.
Open Source provides free source code to everyone. The movement was
pushed by many professionals. This is not Windows freeware.
Another important point is that when you are working
in a company,
other people's code is not the only thing that teaches you. Often,
there are also people in the company who will actually walk you
though the code. Just having the code available is not necessarily
helpful.
Why is this downgraded to a comparison between corporate settings and
Open Source ?
The original question was:
"Why do you feel open source is important, and what for you is the most
important aspect of Linux audio?"
How can my argument be defeated? With evidence. It
would be
interesting to see stats on major contributions to learning to code.
If this data contradicts my argument - I would definitely follow the
evidence.
Again, 'learning to code' is kinda suspicious.
But using "background knowledge" about the
world, it seems to me that
most people know little about open source and are unlikely to learn
by opening a program they like and start reading through the code.
Then these future developers, designers of software, are missing
something. Outsourcing in sight ?
And, finally, people rarely "know a programming
language". You still
know only parts of it and only certain applications. Even if you know
a lot about C++,
You mean about object orientation ?
it is applied differently to graphics, it is applied
differently to GUI, differently to sound, differently to text,
compression, databases, etc. Each application requires specialized
knowledge.
That specialized knowledge is not a function of the language. A
carpenter can be Chinese, one can program compression bits in
assembler, one can write middleware in Erlang.