I think the premise of this post is too broad. Having friendly & helpful error messages doesn't make languages automatically easier to learn. Programming at a professional level is just damn hard, because it's not just about learning syntax of a language and how to read error messages.
Programming is mostly about software architecture, reducing a complex domain problem to instructions and applying solid design patterns ( pun intended)
The current trend of marketing software development education to people that "programming is easy" or that "anyone can pick it up in 6 months in a bootcamp", may be a big disservice and setting them up for failure. Some can and some cannot, but not everyone. I had several friends who tried to go into software testing because of all the hype a few years ago, but just realized it was not for them after wasting a considerable amount of time and money.
Let's use an analogy: many people can learn basics of flying and controlling a small airplane in a "6-months bootcamp" or even in a simulator, but would you entrust them with a big passenger or cargo jet, especially if they find it hard to read one of the controls? How many people actually go through years of training it takes to become a real professional pilot, that can fly anything bigger than a equivalent of sky scooter, capable of making difficult landings in difficult conditions and somebody who really understand the relevant topics in aeronautics, mechanical engineering, customer service, emergency situation management, etc ?
I'm not trying to say that programmers are like pilots, all I'm saying that any profession takes time & dedication, and may not be for everyone. And in some cases having a bit of a technical barrier is inherent to the profession.
I think you are also arguing for "better tools". But better tools don't make it accessible to everyone, nor should they. Planes that are flying now are ages more advanced then 60 years ago. They can practically fly themselves, but does it mean you want everyone to have a pilot license?
Having said that, making readable error messages, while being helpful, isn't a panacea. For example Elm and Elixir and Crystal - all have much better error messages than what "older" languages used to have. But many people still can't easily grok them, especially functional aspects of Elm & Haskell. Even people who've been doing programming for a while. ( This is just anecdotal based on my experiences with other programmers)
I agree, it's not accurate to tell people "programming is easy". Unlike a pilot's license though, there isn't any harm or danger coming from a higher number of people learning an introductory level of programming.
I'd love to hear more about the experiences of people who have invested real time and effort into learning (a bootcamp or something equivalent) and then decided it's not for them. What were the factors that made them reach that conclusion? That would help us understand what we should be saying instead of "programming is easy / anyone can do it".
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I think the premise of this post is too broad. Having friendly & helpful error messages doesn't make languages automatically easier to learn. Programming at a professional level is just damn hard, because it's not just about learning syntax of a language and how to read error messages.
The current trend of marketing software development education to people that "programming is easy" or that "anyone can pick it up in 6 months in a bootcamp", may be a big disservice and setting them up for failure. Some can and some cannot, but not everyone. I had several friends who tried to go into software testing because of all the hype a few years ago, but just realized it was not for them after wasting a considerable amount of time and money.
Let's use an analogy: many people can learn basics of flying and controlling a small airplane in a "6-months bootcamp" or even in a simulator, but would you entrust them with a big passenger or cargo jet, especially if they find it hard to read one of the controls? How many people actually go through years of training it takes to become a real professional pilot, that can fly anything bigger than a equivalent of sky scooter, capable of making difficult landings in difficult conditions and somebody who really understand the relevant topics in aeronautics, mechanical engineering, customer service, emergency situation management, etc ?
I'm not trying to say that programmers are like pilots, all I'm saying that any profession takes time & dedication, and may not be for everyone. And in some cases having a bit of a technical barrier is inherent to the profession.
I think you are also arguing for "better tools". But better tools don't make it accessible to everyone, nor should they. Planes that are flying now are ages more advanced then 60 years ago. They can practically fly themselves, but does it mean you want everyone to have a pilot license?
Having said that, making readable error messages, while being helpful, isn't a panacea. For example Elm and Elixir and Crystal - all have much better error messages than what "older" languages used to have. But many people still can't easily grok them, especially functional aspects of Elm & Haskell. Even people who've been doing programming for a while. ( This is just anecdotal based on my experiences with other programmers)
I agree, it's not accurate to tell people "programming is easy". Unlike a pilot's license though, there isn't any harm or danger coming from a higher number of people learning an introductory level of programming.
I'd love to hear more about the experiences of people who have invested real time and effort into learning (a bootcamp or something equivalent) and then decided it's not for them. What were the factors that made them reach that conclusion? That would help us understand what we should be saying instead of "programming is easy / anyone can do it".