Yes and no. You'll almost certainly need some sort of database backend (non-relational databases are getting pretty popular nowadays). The thing is, you won't actually need to know the query language anymore in many cases. In the case of relational databases (typically mysql/postgres) many languages provide some sort of database abstraction which greatly reduces the amount of database-specific knowledge you need to know. Let's take an example from ruby on rails: The query As for the new "hip" relational-database replacements, they almost invariably have similarly abstracted libraries. The many key-value stores, such as redis, basically just have set/get methods. Document-stores are more complicated to try and classify, but the libraries do simplify things significantly. The point I'm trying to get across here, if a little slowly, is that higher level languages have abstracted databases to the point that a fine grasp of the underlying query language is unneeded; rudimentary knowledge will be enough for the OP's purposes. Okay, final bit. You mention python, but you don't mention what you're doing other than "online". Online stuff doesn't have to have a database necessarily. Sites that can be static (information, no users. Blogs can also be static) shouldn't have a database for performance reasons. Typically, for anything where you have users or dynamic data, it's a good (not 100% required still) idea to use some sort of database. However, for anything that doesn't require complicated relations it might be a good idea to just use redis (which has a good library for python) and not have to deal with the complexities SQL brings with it. If you absolutely need the power relational databases have to offer, elixer can do some of the abstraction I spoke of, though you'll still want to be familiar with the underlying database. I personally find knowing my way around databases useful, but I also think that things are moving away from needing to really have a strong grasp of them and if you don't want to hassle with it you'll be able to "get by" at least. Hopefully that all made sense!
mk See the above note. #bugskii . Perhaps I'm doing it wrong. Do let me know if so. Note: My links all got parenthesis appended to them. "[test](test) test" becomes "[test](test))test" after saving and will not change back. Inserting an extra space lets the space show up, but the extra parenthesis also persists.
becomes simply SELECT * FROM clients WHERE locked=true
. The second, using ORM, hides the query language behind the language's objects. It means the programmer only has to, for simple stuff, know the language and library's syntax. Admittedly, more complex stuff almost necessitates knowledge of the underlying database, but those cases won't come up in all that many situations. Client.where(:locked => true)
It could be. The reasons for my handle on this site, as any, are my own. No harm in asking of course, though since it is unrelated to the overall discussion a pm might be more appropriate. Sorry for the delayed response.
You're probably already aware of the algorithm in question (reddit's), but if not this'll save you a little time looking. The lower bound of a Wilson Score CI. It might not be as applicable with only "upvotes", but it still might be relevant.
I don't have much personal experience with Codeacademy, but I've heard good things in general and I liked the little I saw. I don't think it offers a replacement to good books or formal training (university classes or similar), but it certainly helps and could complement them. It's up to you how you do it and I can't really offer too deep insight - I can't simply forget what I know and then relearn it to objectively judge some method of learning vs my own (and things look different from the other side if I try to judge now). Oh, a final aside. It's good to have coding buddies beyond a point (beyond syntax, around basic algorithms and data structures I think) to talk to as you go. If you don't know any such people in actual life, finding an IRC channel that interests you and has some coders might be a good idea. Small ones (20ish users) are often more helpful and pleasant to be part of. Creating a hubski irc might be a good idea come to think of it. Best of luck.
Regardless of if my interpretation of freedom, my interpretation for "absolute security" must also be rejected for my logic to fail. I see absolute security as practically being in a coma, something I feel almost anyone would say is less desirable than nearly any state of affairs, especially any which contains any sort of reasonable freedom (absolute or not). As such, if you doubt my definition of freedom or my definition of security, but not both, the entire argument still stands strongly I think. I apologize for the delayed response.