..."if you think you're the uber programming god, you're probably expert."
correction: if you think you are the über programming god, you are probably fooling yourself.
Vito Stolidus wrote:
correction: if you think you are the über programming god, you are probably fooling yourself. | |
CaptFalcon33035 wrote:
Lummox JR wrote: Aye. I said an intermediate can make an RPG, but didn't mean to imply a newbie can't. I'm going to make it with all aspects of the code by me. I'm even trying to make a very slimmed-down version of SwapMaps that would really only work with constant proportions of the map because that's really all I'd need. Not a bad idea. Really I think SwapMaps is due for a redesign. I'm stuck on the battle system and housing system though. I'm not sure how I should do it. But, housing can become a problem with the new client-side saving. Unless the house exists on its own minimap, the only way to handle that gracefully would be to save it server-side. Well, anyway, I don't even think you have to be intermediate to create an RPG. Depending on what aspects you plan on putting in, you might need to be intermediate, but not even then. Indeed. In fact working on an RPG is often people's first project, and can be done well by a newbie who's willing to put in the time. Lummox JR | |
Alathon wrote:
For me, if I do have to add labels like 'newbie' and 'advanced', the difference between newbie and intermediate+ in my eyes occurs when your questions shift from syntax related questions (in general) to design-oriented questions such as the viability of one implementation over another. Indeed, and I'd add that an intermediate programmer is usually good at recognizing the flaws in a bad implementation, even if they might occasionally be stumped at finding a good one. Where it goes from intermediate to advanced for me is a question of overall robustness and knowledge, coupled with the ability to work 'outside' the mindframe of learning books and documents. Algorithms are, to my mind, the key to advanced programming. An intermediate programmer should have a few stock algorithms they know (sorts, searches, etc.) and an ability to adapt algorithms to their own use. Someone on the fence to advanced status could decently implement A* pathing, for example. Advanced comes in where you can puzzle some of the algorithm problems out that there may be no solution for. Lummox JR | |
In my mind, the difference between an intermediate and an advanced programmer isn't in their problem-solving ability so much as their ability to write the algorithm that solves the problem, once they have the process in their head. I have my flashes of brilliance every so often that lead me to excellent implementations of solutions I think up, but I don't get them frequently enough or consistantly enough that I call myself an advanced programmer. Usually, I sit with the intermediates and adapt already-developed algorithms to my needs.
So, what I'm saying is, the fact that I can write up an A* in three languages doesn't make me advanced. There's a great list of algorithms and data structures here: http://www.nist.gov/dads/ If you want a test to see what level of programming you're at, take a look at that list. If it's all greek to you, no way you're advanced. Doubtful you're intermediate. People who know what's what with computer programming run into those terms inevitably. Not all of them, by any means, but some of them. As for my level, I call myself intermediate to advanced because if I need to implement something I can almost always manage it, but it just as frequently requires reference to a somewhere such as the NIST site above. However, the fact that I call myself this or that means nothing. There is no real standard, and if Dan Bradley calls himself advanced, for example, then I am on a whole different plane of standards. | |
PirateHead wrote:
I have my flashes of brilliance every so often that lead me to excellent implementations of solutions I think up, but I don't get them frequently enough or consistantly enough that I call myself an advanced programmer. Ahaha, I've had "flashes of brilliance" in dreams. Like if I spend a whole day trying to think of a great way to implement a solution, and end up stumping myself, I'll usually sleep on it and come to just the solution I need (and on the rare occasion that I remember my dream, I'm able to implement it!). It sounds reasonable, considering you can think more freely and such while sleeping, but of all things to think about I think it's pretty bad that I'd be dreaming of algorithms(not that that's all I ever dream about, and not that I always dream). Hiead | |
I'd say that list would likely be Greek to most people, even advanced users. To be an advanced programmer, knowing the plethora of algorithms out there isn't important, but knowing a few of them and knowing how to find the rest or come up with your own is the real trick.
Lummox JR | |
Indeed; Programming also branches into many different areas. You can find some who are absolutely fantastic at certain areas, but more than lacking in others. Typically its harder to find that in a language like BYOND due to its fairly central focus on games (and trivialization of certain other subjects).
For me, if I do have to add labels like 'newbie' and 'advanced', the difference between newbie and intermediate+ in my eyes occurs when your questions shift from syntax related questions (in general) to design-oriented questions such as the viability of one implementation over another.
Where it goes from intermediate to advanced for me is a question of overall robustness and knowledge, coupled with the ability to work 'outside' the mindframe of learning books and documents.
But really, its a blurry line all around; I can tell you who I consider good and who I don't, but if I had to design criteria that would be difficult.