[wernercd]

I've not shown any disdain for history or an inability to code wordpress... in fact, I've said the opposite: I like history and simply don't need it to code.

I don't need to know history to code html, php, javascript, etc. I've a very successful programmer without using the "history' of programming in any shape or form.

"expressing your ignorance" or... I'm simply expressing that I'm a successful programmer who's never used "history" in a decade+ of programming...

You may want to reevaluate "ignorance" as you make claims that you can't support (IE: "disdain" for history and "can't code wordpress" - again, neither statements I've made). Reread my comments.

recap of them: I like history. I don't need history to code wordpress or windows services.

[crististm]

I was not entirely fair to you when trying to make my point. In fact I could see this exact argument of yours coming up and ignored it completely.

What I want to say is that there are entire domains of competence that are irrelevant to a large degree to doing the day's job. Knowing history of computing will not necessary help in making a better program in a way that can be noticed. But history of computing is closely related to computing. Unlike for example history of knitting. Although neither will make you a better programmer now, the first has much better chance at that than the second (although we don't exactly know that). Thus, when someone downplays the importance of history of programming to improving a programmer's mastery, I see it as touting ignorance at not seeing the connections between the two: self sufficiency, arrogance of ego being trapped by the light of today's fads, pop culture that doesn't care about the past or the future.

Or maybe I'm projecting...

[wernercd]

I mean, at a conceptual level, knowing history is important in the "ignorance of history will lead to repeated history" line of thinking - and I don't disagree. ... and knowing why decisions were made can help determine which tools to use (IE: Why use static typing or duck typing and when to use the other... or when to use procedural programming, async, functional, etc...)

Maybe it's a combination of you "projecting" and me not being clear. And trying to discuss what could be deep conversations in a little more than a twitter tag of 140 chars.

I'm personally a .Net Developer and while I do stick with the latest versions (IE: .Net Core), I also have enough experience to know the past (IE: ADO vs Entity Frameworks). I was trained in school on a mainframe (IBM DB2 with RPG and SQL). I'm not trying to stick with the latest "hotness" as most of MY work is actually done via Windows Services, API interactions and moving files around - definitely not the latest fad. With that said, I am working on using good tools to get my job done faster/better - IE: CI/CD pipelines to automate builds, testing, deployment, etc. Tools that didn't exist 5 years ago could be the latest fad but I don't think that's what you are suggesting.

I'm more worried about learning different things (IE: Functional, procedural, async, parallel, etc) than I am worried about "history" of those. When I pick up a programming book, I'm less worried about the "Microsoft created version 1 in 2000 and version 2 in 2005 and..." and more concerned about do's, do not's, best practices, etc.

Maybe it's my personality and the way I "deemphasize" history... it's not that I think it's unimportant... I just think that it's more important to focus on other things. Learning some history along the way is good and fun but it's never been my focus and I've never used what I consider "history" in an interview or a job on a day to day. Maybe that's rubbing people the wrong way lol