[badminton1]

"Learning to code" is somewhat vague.

The "Sorites paradox" is something like: how many grains of sand form a heap? if you remove or add one, is it still a heap?

So, exactly what exactly makes you a programmer? that varies a lot depending on who you ask. Someone said a programmer should be able to detect and report a bug to a hardware manufacturer. Some others say that "learning" (partially, because most programmers don't know every single aspect of a programming language) a general purpose or Turing-complete language makes you a programmer.

I define an "X programmer" where X is backend, frontend, data, whatever... as someone who can not only implement a feature, but do it through understanding rather than through a heuristic of trial and error or reusing code. Also, a person that is able to troubleshoot what is going on if some of the underlying systems is not working as expected.

[Bakary]

I would argue that the most relevant definition would have to address a programmer's role in society rather than their level of actual skill. In this sense anyone having learned enough material to have an actionable skill that regularly comes into play in their lives can credibly be said to have learned to code.