Progress is possible only if we train ourselves to think about programs without thinking of them as pieces of executable code.
Edsger DijkstraRead
A most important, but also most elusive, aspect of any tool is its influence on the habits of those who train themselves in its use. If the tool is a programming language this influence is, whether we like it or not, an influence on our thinking habits.... A programming language is a tool that has profound influence on our thinking habits.
Interpretation
The way we use programming languages shapes our thinking patterns and habits.
Edsger Dijkstra emphasizes the profound impact that programming languages, as tools, have on our cognitive processes. He suggests that these languages not only serve as instruments for coding but also mold our thinking habits, influencing how we approach problem-solving and conceptualize ideas in the realm of technology.
In practice
During a tech conference, this quote can be used to illustrate the importance of understanding the underlying impact of the tools developers use.
Progress is possible only if we train ourselves to think about programs without thinking of them as pieces of executable code.
Simplicity 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.
Technology magnifies differences, and it's been replacing or obviating jobs for a long time. But what happens as that case accelerates? I'm not one of these doomsayers who says, 'There will be no jobs.'
I had two passions growing up - one was music, one was technology. I tried to play in a band for a while, but I was never talented enough to make it. And I started companies. One day came along and I decided to combine the two - and there was Spotify.
Every program has (at least) two purposes: the one for which it was written and another for which it wasn't.
Our energy future is choice, not fate. Oil dependence is a problem we need no longer have-and it's cheaper not to. U.S. oil dependence can be eliminated by proven and attractive technologies that create wealth, enhance choice, and strengthen common security.
To me, it looks more or less like the hardware designers have run out of ideas and that they're trying to pass the blame for the future demise of Moore's Law to the software writers by giving us machines that work faster only on a few key benchmarks!
There are lots of Linux users who don't care how the kernel works, but only want to use it. That is a tribute to how good Linux is.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.