Progress is possible only if we train ourselves to think about programs without thinking of them as pieces of executable code.
In the good old days physicists repeated each other's experiments, just to be sure. Today they stick to FORTRAN, so that they can share each other's programs, bugs included.
Interpretation
What this quote means
Dijkstra critiques the modern reliance on programming over peer verification in physics.
In this quote, Edsger Dijkstra contrasts the collaborative nature of past physics experiments, where physicists would reproduce each other's experiments to validate results, with the current trend of relying solely on programming languages like FORTRAN. He suggests that while modern methods allow for sharing of code, they also carry the risk of sharing existing errors, which may detract from the rigor and trustworthiness that repeated experimental verification once provided.
Themes
In practice
Example use cases
In a discussion about the importance of reproducibility in scientific research, this quote serves as a reminder of the value of traditional experimental methods.
More from Edsger Dijkstra
All quotes βSimplicity is prerequisite for reliability.
The purpose of abstraction is not to be vague, but to create a new semantic level in which one can be absolutely precise.
We shall do a much better programming job, provided that we approach the task with a full appreciation of its tremendous difficulty, provided that we stick to modest and elegant programming languages, provided that we respect the intrinsic limitations of the human mind and approach the task as Very Humble Programmers.
The tools we use have a profound and devious influence on our thinking habits, and therefore on our thinking abilities.
LISP has jokingly been described as "the most intelligent way to misuse a computer." I think that description is a great compliment because it transmits the full flavour of liberation: it has assisted a number of our most gifted fellow humans in thinking previously impossible thoughts.
Similar quotes
No educated person believes the Adam and Eve myth nowadays, but it's surprising how many parents think that it's somehow fun to pass on this falsehood to their children...I would want to argue that the truth of evolution is more interesting and more poetic
If your child gets asthma, the fossil fuel industry doesn't pay. Or if there's a natural disaster, the bill is paid by the taxpayer, not the fossil fuel company.
There are grounds for cautious optimism that we may now be near the end ofthe search for the ultimate laws of nature.
Well, biology today as I see it has an amiable look - quite different from the 19th-century view that the whole arrangement of nature is hostile, 'red in tooth and claw.' That came about because people misread Darwin's 'survival of the fittest.'
Right now, there could well be messages from the stars flying right through this room. Through you and me. And if we had the right receiver set up properly, we could detect them. I still get chills thinking about it.
The edifice of science not only requires material, but also a plan. Without the material, the plan alone is but a castle in the air-a mere possibility; whilst the material without a plan is but useless matter.