1–10 of 15 posts
"I still think that one of the finest tests of programming ability is to hand the programmer about 30 pages of code and see how quickly he can read through and understand it."
Do you agree this was true in 1986? Is it still true now? If your two answers disagree, whence the difference?
Also, consider:
1. 30 pages of well written code != 30 pages of poorly written code
2. 30 pages of well documented code != 30 pages of poorly documented code
3. 30 pages of high level code != 30 pages of low level code
4. 30 pages of COBOL != 30 pages of BASIC != 30 pages or Java != 30 pages of Python
5, 30 pages of Microsoft code = 1 page of mortal code
The finest test of programming ability is what you can build that satisfies requirements and works perfectly. I'm not sure Bill Gates ever understood that.
If not, maybe not so much.
No matter how well designed the code and no matter how often the code is refactored, reality imposes on that neatly designed little world and makes the code sub-optimal.
This is when being able to understand code becomes important. To get inside the head of the author is an invaluable skill (even if the reader and the author are the same person separated in time). To understand why they did what they did (the answer is not always "they were morons"). To understand how to change the code and still guarantee the underlying assumptions.
Also, I would say that being able to read and understand code is even more important when your co-workers are equal to or above your skill level. To try to puzzle out why they did something can lead to an "aha!" type moment which are invaluable in learning new ways of solving problems.
So I would say that being able to read code is important. Maybe not "one of the finest tests" but an important test nonetheless.
Makes no sense to me. Never did. The speed which the code can be understood says much more about the writer than the reader. I have business analysts, project managers, and users that can read and understand my code. Do you really think that's a valid test of "programming ability"? Also, consider: 1. 30 pages of well written code != 30 pages of poorly written code 2. 30 pages of well documented code != 30 pages of po…
Makes no sense to me. Never did. The speed which the code can be understood says much more about the writer than the reader. I have business analysts, project managers, and users that can read and understand my code. Do you really think that's a valid test of "programming ability"? Also, consider: 1. 30 pages of well written code != 30 pages of poorly written code 2. 30 pages of well documented code != 30 pages of po…
Even if that is true, it can still be true that a good way to judge between two coders is to look at how fast they can understand a piece of test code (they look at the same one, of course). If true, it could be a faster test than having them both write an application, no?
In your example, I'd still have them both code something. That's almost always a half hour well spent.
Makes no sense to me. Never did. The speed which the code can be understood says much more about the writer than the reader. I have business analysts, project managers, and users that can read and understand my code. Do you really think that's a valid test of "programming ability"? Also, consider: 1. 30 pages of well written code != 30 pages of poorly written code 2. 30 pages of well documented code != 30 pages of po…
The speed which the code can be understood says much more about the writer than the reader.
I think Gates has a very valid point: there are lots of circumstances where you need the ability to wade into an unknown code base and understand how it behaves (and how it ought to behave). The ability to read through code and understand non-trivial properties of the code really takes some experience to develop -- that is directly relevant to code review, for example.
Makes no sense to me. Never did. The speed which the code can be understood says much more about the writer than the reader. I have business analysts, project managers, and users that can read and understand my code. Do you really think that's a valid test of "programming ability"? Also, consider: 1. 30 pages of well written code != 30 pages of poorly written code 2. 30 pages of well documented code != 30 pages of po…
The speed which the code can be understood says much more about the writer than the reader. I think the point is that you hold the writer of the code invariant, and then substitute different code readers; the rates at which two different people can understand a given piece of code says something about their ability as programmers. More than just rate of understanding, I think depth of understanding is just as importa…
There's a huge difference between a "needing the ability to wade into an unknown code base and understand how it behaves" and "one of the finest tests of programming ability".
I still think that *one* of the finest tests ...
If a person is good (and quick) at understanding someone else's code, it is a good indication of him/her being blessed with a good analytical mind, and experience/habit of delving in to code.
Of course, this ability helps when working in a team, but more importantly it is required to understand the existing solutions and their drawbacks/advantages. e.g. If one intends to write a web server or a new VM for a language, it would be helpful to refer and understand the existing open solutions, before starting out.
In short, the ability to understand someone else's code quickly is a definite pointer of a good potential programming ability. Getting a person to write code is the best test most times, but the ability to adapt and learn new language/technology faster is governed highly by ability to read code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The speed which the code can be understood says much more about the writer than the reader. I think the point is that you hold the writer of the code invariant, and then substitute different code readers; the rates at which two different people can understand a given piece of code says something about their ability as programmers. More than just rate of understanding, I think depth of understanding is just as importa…
Good points. However... There's a huge difference between a "needing the ability to wade into an unknown code base and understand how it behaves" and "one of the finest tests of programming ability".