I started programming in summer 1965 with an expert in the field as a
mentor. As I said you're new.
I am not saying random coding is
efficient. It is horribly inefficient. That can be less of a problem if you
have a few filters early in the process, so cats on keyboards is not really
inside the method.
The process is more throwing everything into the
project, let it stew a while and then removing the parts that foul up the
results. You do NOT get an understanding of all the interactions, nor can you
be sure there are not unintended consequences. Once you have something that
works, you MAY be able to analyze the result and gain some understanding after
the fact, but you do NOT start with full understanding. 'Analysis Paralysis' is
a catch phrase for practical reasons. But more to the point, there are sections
of patent law that are designed specifically to exclude patents on this kind of
result.
On the other hand, having SOME understanding of what you are
doing helps a great deal, and genius is the ability to know what to throw in
without necessarily understand why it might help. Patents, when they work well,
reward for taking risks that would otherwise be avoided.
However, I do
see a point that you seem to be trying to reach. It is not that you have to
understand the process to program it or build it. It is that you have to
understand the process in order to TEACH others how to do it. And that is the
major failure of the PTO; they no longer emphasize the teaching aspect when it
comes to computer programming.
---
MTEW [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
| 
