On 4/02/24 13:20, avi.e.gr...@gmail.com wrote:
Dave,
You and I have had some experience in teaching or tutoring others and I think
it fair to say our motivation is closer to teaching someone how they can fish
for themselves rather than just handing them a fully-cooked fish.
Which may push the debate 'up' a level, in that there are two pertinent
Python Discussion Lists (amongst the many): Tutor which is expressly for
learners (and tutors), and this one which is to discuss Python.
Accordingly, one might suggest that people 'here' are looking for a
direct answer - the fish (having tried to fish for themselves), but
learners (seeking to learn to fish) should be asking elsewhere.
This would sort-out the type/level of questions that OPs may have. As
well as indicating an appropriate approach to 'answers'.
However, there's no rule which says one has to ask in one place or the
other (nor am I suggesting such, although...). Then again, might the
lack of forethought evident in some questions and the forum-used,
indicate a type of person who wouldn't investigate to see which is the
best place for his/her enquiries anyway?
Tutor List: https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
Lists Overview: https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo
My favorite kinds of questions, thus, include someone who explains what they
are trying to do and shows some code along with indications of what it produced
(including error messages) and what it should produce. Then the question should
not be a request to just FIX THIS or WRITE IT FOR ME but asking if someone can
show what they did wrong with some idea where it went wrong.
This may not be so common but it allows faster and easier help.
+1
...
I will end with a comment. I have heard of interview techniques for a job where
they deliberately supply a problem in which the goal is not so much to be easy
to solve in front of them in real time but to watch how the person looking for
a job responds to the uncertainties and asks follow-up questions or verbalizes
things like, if it is like this, I might use this technique but if you also
need that then ...
So, I shudder to think what happens if someone being interviewed turns around
and asks us and further confuses things with changes to make it harder to
recognize they are asking for outside help. The answer expected may well be to
NOT use say the older versions of PASCAL to do something but switch to
something better suited (and for that matter available.) I would not want to
program the DES encryption/decryption method in Pascal again! And these days,
it seems much better to just find a module or package that meets such needs.
As you know, I investigate Cognitive Psychology. Accordingly, such is
interesting to me. In many cases, I'll interview for motivation, not
just particular skills - but perhaps that's another can-of-worms.
How about "when is 1 + 1 not 2?". This is a bit of a mind-bender, but
leads towards debugging ability* - what if your code was showing some
unbelievable result like this?
The answer is (or rather, "could be") 10, ie we're looking at binary cf
decimal, coding.
Do I hear some groans? Yes, fair-enough! There was absolutely no
"context" to the question - whereas when coding/debugging we would
expect to have some 'framing' of our thinking. At the same time, 'fixed
mode thinking' will prevent many people from even considering such
possibilities - whether as-asked or in a dev.env...
* In the ?good old days, career progression was thought to be:
(mainframe) Computer Operator, to Computer Programmer, to Systems
Analyst, etc. However, as I pointed-out (to an IBM 'big-wig' who took an
instant dislike as a result) the valued skills of an Analyst are that
(s)he can see 'patterns' - whereas the skills of debugging involve
realising why an expected pattern doesn't work (as-expected).
Another analysis might be to decide if the job requires a 'lateral
thinker' or a more single-minded approach. (us lateral thinkers tend to
ask (loads of) questions, and thus can be quite 'annoying' individuals).
Then there is the main-stay of many job-adverts: "attention to detail"
and the question of whether someone who can't [be bothered to] write an
half-decent email-message (with spell-checker likely built-in) is going
to be productive when communicating with a pedantic compiler?
Again, some people are suited to this business (or specific jobs
within), and some (?many) are not - but many are (perhaps reluctantly)
programming to get some other job done...
--
Regards,
=dn
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
