Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Torvalds' quote about good programmers

programmers.stackexchange.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 108 posts

Re: Torvalds' quote about good programmers

#21

Post by michaelochurch »

The problem with code quality is that there's so much AND-ing that most people give up on understanding this massively difficult problem that is as much social and industrial as it is technical.

One of the first things you learn about systems is that parallel dependencies (OR-gates) are better than serial dependencies (AND-gates). The first has redundancy, the second has multiple single points of failure. That's also true with regard to how people manage their careers. Naive people will "yes, sir" and put their eggs into one basket. More savvy people network across the company so that if things go bad where they are, they have options.

To have code quality, you need people who are good at writing code AND reasonable system designs AND competent understanding of the relevant data structures AND a culture (of the company or project) that values and protects code quality. All of these are relatively uncommon, the result being that quality code is damn rare.

Re: Torvalds' quote about good programmers

#22

Post by jrajav »

hermannj314 wrote: post #11

Next week on Hacker News: Bad Programmers worry about their code. Good programmers ship. "Bad programmers [technique A on programming KPI metric N1]. Good programmers [technique B on programming KPI metric N1]." Responses: Someone will ask, "What about metric N2?" And someone will say, "What about technique C?" Someone will post a personal anecdote showing that people really underestimate the value of A. Someone will…

10 people learn about techniques A, B, and C who didn't before. 10 other people start thinking in terms of metrics N1 and N2 who weren't before. We learn and improve collectively. I think that is a pretty amazing thing about the internet and boards like this.

That's not to say that some things don't get passed around a lot, but that's generally because they're worthwhile enough to make sure that everyone gets a look.

Re: Torvalds' quote about good programmers

#23

Post by tisme »

okal wrote: post #20
dsymonds wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's other options than "release early release often" and "waterfall".

What might those be? Honest question. My inexperience is probably showing, but I have a hard time picturing what the middle ground might look like.

One of the big tricks here is not to be religious about any technique. Pick what fits best given the information that you've got for the situation that you find yourself in and don't be afraid to change the mix over time as the situation changes or you find yourself in the possession of new knowledge that is inconsistent with your past views on the state of affairs.

If you blindly adhere to some method or other then you're going to find out exactly what the limitations are so you are going to have to be flexible and you're going to have to mix-and-match as time goes by.

As an example, 'agile' comes up here with some regularity. It's a great principle but it's not a religious thing. Feel free to adopt some but not all of agile to come out ahead. Adopt all of agile in a religious fashion and you'll come out a loser.

Re: Torvalds' quote about good programmers

#24

Post by mathattack »

I've seen this is numerous areas.

Think about business analysis... Let's say you're analyzing the best way to support Marketing at a consumer products company like Colgate. If you start with fancy windows, or the latest technology, you won't help the business nearly as much as if you think through the data needs of the business first, and then worry about presentation later. The data model outlasts the presentation software.

Consider doing a webpage. It's much better to think about what you want to show (the HTML) first, and worry about style (CSS) and scripting (pick your tool) after.

This isn't to say coding isn't important too. You need programming skills to get what you need in the end. It's that data is the foundation. A poor data model reflects either an overly complex or unthought business model.

Re: Torvalds' quote about good programmers

#25

Post by necrodome »

antirez wrote: post #4

This is one of the few programming quotes that is not just abstract crap, but one thing you can use to improve your programming skills 10x IMHO. Something like 10 years ago I was lucky enough that a guy told me and explained me this stuff, that I was starting to understand myself btw, and programming suddenly changed for me. If you get the data structures right, the first effect is that the code becomes much simpler…

any concrete examples you can point to?

Re: Torvalds' quote about good programmers

#27

Post by lifeisstillgood »

michaelochurch wrote: post #21

The problem with code quality is that there's so much AND-ing that most people give up on understanding this massively difficult problem that is as much social and industrial as it is technical. One of the first things you learn about systems is that parallel dependencies (OR-gates) are better than serial dependencies (AND-gates). The first has redundancy, the second has multiple single points of failure. That's also…

Completely agree - code quality depends on code review and the belief you should not foist rubbish on others - and that is almost always down to culture and comms

Re: Torvalds' quote about good programmers

#28

Post by Retric »

okal wrote: post #20
dsymonds wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's other options than "release early release often" and "waterfall".

What might those be? Honest question. My inexperience is probably showing, but I have a hard time picturing what the middle ground might look like.

One of the classics is basically the mid point between them. AKA throw one away.

Requirements desgin, DEMO, Requirements, Design, Implantation, Verification, Release, Maintenance.

The idea was to use a prototyping language for the Demo and then a production worthy language for release. The problem was a lot of Demo's ended up in production for a literally decades because people tryed to create 'over architected crap' which got scraped or takes decades to release.

Honestly, I think the real problem with most early Development strategy's is so few people have a clue how to actually design good software. Great solutions are designed to create minimal systems to solve the problem which are flexible because they are minimal and programmers can alter code, rather than people conceiving every possible change request up front.

Re: Torvalds' quote about good programmers

#29

Post by hermannj314 »

jrajav wrote: post #22
hermannj314 wrote: post #11

Next week on Hacker News: Bad Programmers worry about their code. Good programmers ship. "Bad programmers [technique A on programming KPI metric N1]. Good programmers [technique B on programming KPI metric N1]." Responses: Someone will ask, "What about metric N2?" And someone will say, "What about technique C?" Someone will post a personal anecdote showing that people really underestimate the value of A. Someone will…

10 people learn about techniques A, B, and C who didn't before. 10 other people start thinking in terms of metrics N1 and N2 who weren't before. We learn and improve collectively. I think that is a pretty amazing thing about the internet and boards like this. That's not to say that some things don't get passed around a lot , but that's generally because they're worthwhile enough to make sure that everyone gets a look…

I agree 100%.

To me, one of the downsides of many internet discussion is that it seems complicated issues get reduced to a single dimension just to get enough traction to have the conversation. And then most of the conversation is between the camps that have internalized and accepted the simplified mental model of the problem and those that haven't. Maybe that's is a good thing for the reasons you highlight.

In my opinion, it feels like we are fishing with a bigger net, but we aren't fishing any deeper now than we were 3 years ago.

Post reply on HN