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

How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary (2002)

samizdat.mines.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–49 of 49 posts

Re: How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary (2002)

#41

Post by gknoy »

Jugurtha wrote: post #20

>>But it is really child's play compared to everything else >>that a good programmer must do to make a software system >>that succeeds for both the customer and myriad colleagues >>for whom she is partially responsible. Why the use of the word "she" ? I see a lot of articles written where the undefined person will be a she. I speak french, and "person" is a feminine name, so you can say about a person "she", but why…

You'll notice the same thing in the examples given in role playing game books. It's relatively common to use a female actor as an example, though I cannot remember why.

It's not a matter of being grammaticaly incorrect or correct, but rather to imply that for this example, the programmer is female. It's goal seems to be inclusion. The other reason is that perhaps that the programmer the author thought about when writing this is a lady.

Re: How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary (2002)

#42

Post by mseebach »

fit2rule wrote: post #18
drunkpotato wrote: post #5

What is wrong with us in this sick, perverted, twisted, dying and rotting industry? If you encounter these problems, start applying to a new position. Don't deal with management; don't "educate" them. Don't fix the organization you've tricked yourself into joining. Just polish your resume and leave. It seems like we're an industry that defines Stockholm Syndrome.

Philosophically, programmers can do anyones job, as long as that person is willing to describe it in a way that it can be abstracted properly. Programmers are unique in the world, in a philosophical sense, in that the skills and techniques of programming can be applied to any human subject, and seriously productive results can be attained. Computers are an "infinity machine" in that any single subject that a human be…

Wow, that's .. incredible hubris.

There are good programmers and there are bad programmers. There are good managers and there are bad managers. The good variants of either are very valuable and can deliver huge value to very diverse businesses. The bad ones, not so much.

Since the computer-based automation of everything is a reasonably recent phenonomen, there have been more low-hanging fruit to be picked by bad programmers. Management is a much more mature field, so having "Teach yourself Management in 24 hours"-level competence is much less likely to have a positive yield.

What you're describing is just general intelligence and analytical thought. It's harder and rarer than most people think, and both managers and programmers to be really good at their jobs. But just as there are less demanding management positions in the world, there is an emergent class of programmers who are perfectly capable of building and maintaining simple CRUD apps to spec, but wouldn't need to know half of what is in this guide to be effective.

Re: How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary (2002)

#43

Post by special »

V-2 wrote: post #26
k__ wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't hate... It's a simple method to get people thinking about issues :)

But this text is not about these issues

If the text was about the issue, the method of provocation wouldn't be as effective.

Re: How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary (2002)

#44

Post by bluecalm »

aurelius wrote: post #33
Jugurtha wrote: post #20

>>But it is really child's play compared to everything else >>that a good programmer must do to make a software system >>that succeeds for both the customer and myriad colleagues >>for whom she is partially responsible. Why the use of the word "she" ? I see a lot of articles written where the undefined person will be a she. I speak french, and "person" is a feminine name, so you can say about a person "she", but why…

The grammatically correct generic pronoun in English is 'he': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they#Generic_he Anything else is just politically correct nonsense.

Every modern dictionary disagree. English usage of singular they dates back to 15th century still you assert it here without any argument. Nothing wrong with asserting things if you do that with stuff disprovable by one dictionary/wikipedia search though you make not too bright impression to put it mildly.

As to using she it's very common convention these days in some domains. Many books on games use that for example (chess, bridge, go, poker - you need to a pronoun for black/white/last to act player there ). I also saw some computer science books using it. At this point I would say it's so common that it becomes part of the language. I personally like it although I can see how it raises eyebrows when encountered for the first time :)

Re: How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary (2002)

#46

Post by OvidNaso »

fit2rule wrote: post #18
drunkpotato wrote: post #5

What is wrong with us in this sick, perverted, twisted, dying and rotting industry? If you encounter these problems, start applying to a new position. Don't deal with management; don't "educate" them. Don't fix the organization you've tricked yourself into joining. Just polish your resume and leave. It seems like we're an industry that defines Stockholm Syndrome.

Philosophically, programmers can do anyones job, as long as that person is willing to describe it in a way that it can be abstracted properly. Programmers are unique in the world, in a philosophical sense, in that the skills and techniques of programming can be applied to any human subject, and seriously productive results can be attained. Computers are an "infinity machine" in that any single subject that a human be…

Almost every human is capable of speech. We have a built in interpreter that can recognize and produce an infinite amount of understandable sentences.

By your logic. Everyone who can speak is Shakespeare.

Re: How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary (2002)

#47

Post by jkarni »

V-2 wrote: post #39
jkarni wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get your point. Obviously if it's a really bad convention (naming all predicates '{something}Th1s1sAFuncT10nThatReturnsABooleanValueAndILikeCheese', say), it might be worth breaking, even if it's initially distracting. Presumably you want to be making the point that this is a convention that isn't worth breaking?

It is conventional to use "he" when you mean "someone" (regardless of the actual gender). Of course you may argue that this convention is evil, as a product of political oppression etc. etc. And I'm not even questioning that - my point is that this is beyond the point. Even if it's true, it doesn't mean it has to be brought up everywhere all the time. I'd like to be able to read an article on programming (or any othe…

What? It has to be brought up everywhere. That's the whole point behind trying to change usage: people are supposed to start doing it, and then it's likely to brought to your mind.

Unless your point is that you're tired of it coming out as an explicit point for discussion, as in this current thread of the conversation. That's optional to the core of the effort.

Re: How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary (2002)

#48

Post by V-2 »

jkarni wrote: post #47
V-2 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is conventional to use "he" when you mean "someone" (regardless of the actual gender). Of course you may argue that this convention is evil, as a product of political oppression etc. etc. And I'm not even questioning that - my point is that this is beyond the point. Even if it's true, it doesn't mean it has to be brought up everywhere all the time. I'd like to be able to read an article on programming (or any othe…

What? It has to be brought up everywhere. That's the whole point behind trying to change usage: people are supposed to start doing it, and then it's likely to brought to your mind. Unless your point is that you're tired of it coming out as an explicit point for discussion, as in this current thread of the conversation. That's optional to the core of the effort.

"It has to be brought up everywhere. That's the whole point behind trying to change usage"

It's not much of a point then ;)

If it even did some good to anyone. But all this linguistic ritual smells of magical thinking to me. The idea that if you change the usus and call things differently, they will change. It's pushing on a string.

Basically it's another incarnation of Facebook's "liking this picture will end world hunger" :)

No, fixing the world is not that simple. Just you wait, gender inequality - I'll replace all the "he"s with "she"s on my blog. Ouch that's tough blow, I can only hope my misogyne silicone bracelet will shield me!

"Unless your point is that you're tired of it coming out as an explicit point for discussion, as in this current thread of the conversation. That's optional to the core of the effort."

If one decides to be importunate and pushy (ever had that friend who wouldn't talk about anything else that 9/11 conspiracy, for example - be it at work, at lunch, parties...?) - fine, but don't be surprised if it creates backlash and is counter-effective on occasions. It's a trade-off that should be weighed in. You're free to use that tactic just as I'm free to comment on it :)

Re: How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary (2002)

#49

Post by rwallace »

fit2rule wrote: post #18
drunkpotato wrote: post #5

What is wrong with us in this sick, perverted, twisted, dying and rotting industry? If you encounter these problems, start applying to a new position. Don't deal with management; don't "educate" them. Don't fix the organization you've tricked yourself into joining. Just polish your resume and leave. It seems like we're an industry that defines Stockholm Syndrome.

Philosophically, programmers can do anyones job, as long as that person is willing to describe it in a way that it can be abstracted properly. Programmers are unique in the world, in a philosophical sense, in that the skills and techniques of programming can be applied to any human subject, and seriously productive results can be attained. Computers are an "infinity machine" in that any single subject that a human be…

> So if you think an organization is broken, programming can often-times fix it.

Believing this fallacy will bring you nothing but suffering.

If an organization is limited - if the will is there to do the right thing but the workload is more than the people involved can handle - then programming can indeed help, by amplifying productivity.

But a broken organization is not merely one where means are insufficient. It's one where you are forbidden to do the right thing. That's not a technical problem, it's a political one, and no amount of programming can fix it. You have to either get into a political fight - which probably isn't your area of comparative advantage, but best of luck if you do take that approach - or get out and find a job somewhere less dysfunctional.

Post reply on HN