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

How to recognise a good programmer (2007)

inter-sections.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 47 posts

Re: How to recognise a good programmer (2007)

#11

Post by diN0bot »

csytan wrote: post #3
diN0bot wrote: post #2

quality is still hard to measure. speaking from experience, i've always had passion and personal projects, etc, but i used to be a sucky programmer. now i feel like i've mastered certain things, but i'm still developing and getting better. for one thing, quality comes from sustained effort and committment. i've been working full time on startups for a while. that's a hell of a lot different than someone doing a diffe…

I find that for me, side projects are very beneficial because they give me absolute freedom to try new things without stepping on co-workers toes. I have to agree that metrics don't tell the whole story. It really depends on what the programmer is looking for. Some people may be attracted to new features & complexity in their projects, while others look to design a small simple project.

trying new things is great. it's also extremely different, or rather limited, than what is needed for a start up. that is, you need A LOT more than the desire and experience of toying with new things.

toying is part of the inventor spirit and different projects need different things. one project might be ok with one of the mockups architects make. another project might need the life sized building. and so on in between, changing as the project grows.

Re: How to recognise a good programmer (2007)

#12

Post by marciovm123 »

edw519 wrote: post #8

I know OP means well, but this post provides far more data about his own experience than anything that can be reliably used by the reader. What he calls "indicators", I call "co-factors". They may or may not accompany a given programmer, and they predict nothing. Generally speaking, good programmers are intelligent and do care about their work, but his positive indicators are much more a matter of personal preference…

That misses out on efficiency. Good work that takes an inordinate amount of time can indicate high standards but not the ability to get things done (which I would consider an attribute of a good programmer).

Re: How to recognise a good programmer (2007)

#13

Post by patio11 »

I subscribe to the Build Stuff school of programmer evaluation. Why do you hire a programmer? So you can have him build stuff. Has he built stuff? Then he can probably build stuff. If he hasn't build stuff, he might be able to build stuff, but it is a better idea to have somebody else pay to figure out whether he can build stuff or not.

Re: How to recognise a good programmer (2007)

#14

Post by cakesy »

edw519 wrote: post #8

I know OP means well, but this post provides far more data about his own experience than anything that can be reliably used by the reader. What he calls "indicators", I call "co-factors". They may or may not accompany a given programmer, and they predict nothing. Generally speaking, good programmers are intelligent and do care about their work, but his positive indicators are much more a matter of personal preference…

What we are looking for is a way to find good programmers, for non-technical people. You seem to be missing this point, and have gone of on a rant.

How do you look at someones work and tell if it is good? Most projects involve more than one programmer, and how can you even tell how good it looks underneath the front? How do you know it even works as it is supposed to?

You are basically saying nothing at all.

Re: How to recognise a good programmer (2007)

#15

Post by cakesy »

Dilpil wrote: post #6

In practice, how much of this article is about informing business folk and how much is about patting ourselves on the back?

It is really hard to tell someone competent, let alone good. Consider doing it for a surveyor or pilot, how would you tell a good one? Not easy.

Re: How to recognise a good programmer (2007)

#16

Post by derefr »

patio11 wrote: post #13

I subscribe to the Build Stuff school of programmer evaluation. Why do you hire a programmer? So you can have him build stuff. Has he built stuff? Then he can probably build stuff. If he hasn't build stuff, he might be able to build stuff, but it is a better idea to have somebody else pay to figure out whether he can build stuff or not.

So, if everyone follows your philosophy, how do people get started building stuff?

Re: How to recognise a good programmer (2007)

#17

Post by mquander »

derefr wrote: post #16
patio11 wrote: post #13

I subscribe to the Build Stuff school of programmer evaluation. Why do you hire a programmer? So you can have him build stuff. Has he built stuff? Then he can probably build stuff. If he hasn't build stuff, he might be able to build stuff, but it is a better idea to have somebody else pay to figure out whether he can build stuff or not.

So, if everyone follows your philosophy, how do people get started building stuff?

Hint: You do not have to be employed by a company in order to build stuff.

Re: How to recognise a good programmer (2007)

#19

Post by derefr »

mquander wrote: post #17
derefr wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, if everyone follows your philosophy, how do people get started building stuff?

Hint: You do not have to be employed by a company in order to build stuff.

When I say "if everyone follows this philosophy," I include both VCs and college acceptance boards in that antecedent. Then, presuming you don't have a trust fund, the only way to get your start building stuff is to do it on the side while being underemployed; this is a net efficiency loss for the economy.

Re: How to recognise a good programmer (2007)

#20

Post by mistermann »

araneae wrote: post #10

Just something I noticed: "If your potential programmer didn’t do any programming before university, and all his experience starts when she got her first job, she’s probably not a good programmer." This is the only time he uses the female pronoun anywhere in his post, and he uses it to describe a programmer that started in college and isn't any good. Conscious or not, it's somewhat accurate; female cs majors are less…

Maybe it shows he actually knows what he's talking about! ;) Not that I agree with the article entirely...
Post reply on HN