The problem isn't the user-friendliness of the tools (many very friendly tools exist), it's the amount of energy the author is willing to invest (approximately none). When exposed to truly trivial tooling, the problem becomes a lack of practice in the type of thinking that leads to good programs. There we see that the core of the issue why programming isn't "easy" is that it's just not.
It takes practice to get computers to do what you want to do well and no matter what tools you use getting to know the tools will not even take 5% of the time that you need to get to a place where you do what you want.
Furthermore, the clamoring that there is some sort of nefarious gatekeeping cabal keeping programming from being easy to whoever cares to shout about it is fundamentally dismissive of the actual effort and practice put in by people who used to have (but no longer have) this problem. Sometimes the answer is just that it's not trivial thing to do and this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. We don't think this of math, we don't think this of making good drawings or paintings.
> ... it's the amount of energy the author is willing to invest (approximately none). When exposed to truly trivial tooling, the problem becomes a lack of practice in the type of thinking that leads to good programs. There we see that the core of the issue why programming isn't "easy" is that it's just not.
If PATH and installing python is a struggle for them, hoo boy, no wonder they don't feel like part of the "code club".
I merely type into my favorite search bar with auto complete
"make sure /u"
And I get:
"make sure /usr/local/bin is in your $path"
And top result is a SO spelling out what this message means and how to check.
Engineering, of any discipline, is the sum of three phases: domain research, applying that knowledge to build something, testing that thing you built. With experience, you spend less time on 1 and more on 2, but with learning software, you spend the lion's share in 1.
We still need to lower the barriers to entry. That involves teaching heuristics on how to solve problems.
We do and we try every which way to make it 'natural' and 'easy', sometimes with vaunted social goals like stemming drop-out rates. The reality is, at some point, you just have to sit down, put your head down, and power through. Sometimes, like you alluded, there are no shortcuts.
There are programming environments (sometimes even gamified) for learning, but if you want to use something to solve general purpose problems, you just have to learn it.
Perhaps this is a cultural difference then, efforts to make math 'natural' and 'easy' are not something my secondary education had. You could either do it or you could not and if you could not you were put in a class that had basically no math (or just some very simple math if you picked economics).
It takes practice to get computers to do what you want to do well and no matter what tools you use getting to know the tools will not even take 5% of the time that you need to get to a place where you do what you want.
Furthermore, the clamoring that there is some sort of nefarious gatekeeping cabal keeping programming from being easy to whoever cares to shout about it is fundamentally dismissive of the actual effort and practice put in by people who used to have (but no longer have) this problem. Sometimes the answer is just that it's not trivial thing to do and this shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. We don't think this of math, we don't think this of making good drawings or paintings.