[kartan]

> It was meant to be, in response to OP's hyperbole that there's nothing new being created.

You are right. Sorry for not expressing myself with clarity. To say that there's nothing new being created is hyperbolic and it is not what I wanted to say.

I just wanted to note that the pace of change is too slow to keep things interesting for decades. I am sure that if I do not code for 20 years, I will need to learn new things to get back into it as enough changes will have had accumulated in that time.

[grawprog]

I can't say i've got anything close to your experience, but for me programming isn't necessarily about the challenge of solving some programming problem, but using it to make things. I like being able to type words and numbers into a computer, give them meaning, and use them to create new things. I don't really care much about whatever's new or awesome. I just come up with things i want to make that are interesting to me and make them for the sake of it. It's using programming to make things that interests me, not so much the solving the challenges of programming itself.

For example, to use something you mentioned in another post, a* or djikstra's algorithms. They're used over and over again because they work well. But that can be anything from a massive AAA open worlder, to a simple 2d platformer, down to something like dwarf fortress. All of those are games, all of those are using those algorithms for similar purposes, but each of those games couldn't be more different than eachother.

It's similar to the way nearly all music is made from the same 8 notes and scales. But people don't usually learn to play music for the challenge of learning scales. People learn to play music so they can play songs they like or write their own songs.

[rco8786]

Yea, I don't disagree at all!