Originally, "code" referred to machine language. "Programming" meant designing the computation, and "coding" referred to translating it to machine language. "Automatic coding" was the term for translating a high level program to machine code, and it covered compiling and interpretation.<p>You can read all about it in Grace Hopper's 1955 paper <i>Automatic Coding for Digital Computers</i>.<p><a href="http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/univac/HopperAutoCodingPaper_1955.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/univac/HopperAutoCodingPaper_19...</a><p>Though a woman, she talks the masculinized talk:<p>"The
analysis
is
the
responsibility
of
the
mathematician
or
engineer,
the
methods
or
systems
man."<p>[...]<p>"The
job
of
the
programmer
is
that
of
adapting
the
problem
definition
to
the
abilities
and
idiosyncracies
of
the
particular
computer.
He
will
be
vitally
concerned
with
input
and
output
and
with
the
flow
of
operations
through
the
computer.
He
must
have
a
thorough
knowledge
of
the
computer
components
and
their
relative
speeds
and
virtues."<p>[...]<p>"It
is
then
the
job
of
the
coder
to
reduce
the
flow
charts
to
the
de-
tailed
list
of
computer
instructions.
At
this
point,
an
exact
and
comprehensive
knowledge
of
the
computer,
its
code,
coding
tricks,
details
of
sentinels
and
of
pulse
code
are
required."
I don't think this really achieves what it sets out to do, unless it was meant to be aimed at already very tech-literate people who just don't program yet. It fails my usual test for laypersons' explanations: would my mum understand it?<p>My mum is a smart but non-techie person. I think this article, jumping off from its irrelevant take on business needs, through a (in my opinion) backwards diversion that fails to actually explain how computers process and display text, only then to touch on algorithms before racing off talking about conferences and how programmers feel about things, doesn't come close in all that to a solid laypersons' explanation. Soon it's asking you to evalute chunks of code when, if you are reading this article as someone who wants to know "what is code?", <i>you don't even know what a loop is yet</i>.<p>This seems more like "What is tech culture?" for people who are already a part of tech culture. I think people like it for its animations and interactive elements, but when you strip those away there's very little actual content there.
This is one of my favourite articles. It's the first one I link to someone interested in coding or becoming a developer.<p>Even as a competent programmer, it's worth having a flick through as Paul Ford's presentation of code as a whole is so engaging and informative.
The 'scrum master' guy in the first chapter is the sort of terrible communicator who gives technical people a bad name. He either can't or won't express himself in terms familiar to his audience, instead throwing out a stream of terms that he knows mean nothing in a bid to appear sophisticated.
Amusing and whimsical. So.much.content. I enjoyed the end though. I spent about 17 minutes scrolling through, reading different parts and got to the end. It called me out for reading nearly 2k works per minute to finish in that time. haha.
So you listened to the Tomorrow podcast rerun as well?<p>I think I skimmed this when it first came out, but after two years working at a consulting firm where our clients are borderline tech illiterate, this seems like a pretty decent primer to me. It's not that our clients are idiots (mostly), it's just that they are lacking 20 years or context. This does a great job at filling in some of the gaps.
A favorite article of mine! Paul Ford has continued to write good explainers for Bloomberg Businessweek (most recently on the Github acquisition: <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-06/github-is-microsoft-s-7-5-billion-undo-button" rel="nofollow">https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-06/github-is...</a>) but I've been waiting for him to write something long form again...
>Some things that aren’t yet computers—dental floss, flashlights—will fall eventually.<p>My flashlight (bought before 2015) includes a microcontroller. I think most flashlights do now.
I wish they would tell the story further, including how the man in taupe blazer would deliver the project and whether it would be a success or not, and what would happen past delivery.
To answer the question (without having read the article): Code is communication.<p>Code is used to communicate your intent to<p>- a machine<p>- others working on the same problem or application<p>- your future self
Obligatory source code: <a href="https://github.com/BloombergMedia/whatiscode" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/BloombergMedia/whatiscode</a><p>(I have a merged PR in there... do you? :))