[doktrin]

Agreed. I am largely self taught as well, and have found a lot of value in reading texts on CS / programming fundamentals :

  * Computer Architecture
  * Operating Systems
  * Algorithms
  * Data Structures
  * Database Fundamentals
  * etc.

In addition, more seminal-yet-not-directly-practical books such as SICP are quite valuable. I've been meaning to read TECS (a copy of which is staring at me as we speak), however I have not had the time to devote to its projects yet.

Edited to add :

In addition, reading up on web application architecture was quite helpful. This is increasingly important as modern frameworks may otherwise abstract away concepts to the point of making them very black-boxy.

That said, my goal was not to rush towards an MVP or prototype. I intend to be a competent developer first, and a founder second. If these were reversed, I might well have adopted the OP's approach instead.

[nahname]

Are these things that were helpful or got you started?

I don't think anyone is challenging the value of studying those topics. It just seems to be general consensus you don't start with them.

[doktrin]

I suppose it depends on how started is defined, but yes - having an understanding of the topics I mentioned preceded working as a junior developer.

[nahname]

What was the order of learning for loop, function and class? Did those proceed architecture, algorithms, data structures, etc...?

Personally, the challenge of learning the more base knowledge and gaining a deeper understanding of computer science is that until you are really good at making things, you honestly cannot tell the difference.

[doktrin]

We can certainly agree to disagree, but I don't think that being "really good at making things" is a pre-requisite to understanding some of the principles underlying said "things". In many ways they are related-yet-distinct disciplines (Computer Science vs. Software Engineering).

I readily admit that I may suffer from some bias in this regard, since I find more abstract topics to be a lot of fun. There are many roads to Rome, however this is one that I personally found to be useful.

[nahname]

I have some friends/colleagues like that, and they are a certainly a minority. All very deep thinkers and great to work with. I could see how learning all of the abstract material would help with that learning type, so I don't think we disagree. Everyone should use whatever approach works best for themselves. This is probably a better point than anything else.

I was focused on my own experience and the experience I've had with the majority. Generalization and such.