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

I am a programmer

jacquesmattheij.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 130 posts

Re: I am a programmer

#61

Post by _delirium »

rcfox wrote: post #56
TheCapn wrote: post #52

The biggest quarrel I have with this whole debacle is how it all started out. A group of wise asses decided they should fancy their title up and now everyone has to "to stay relevant". The fact is I AM a Software Engineer. I have a degree in Applied Science and I have my Iron Ring. I am registered with my provincial Professional Body. Saying that, I am not just a "Programmer" (I do not mean to sound derogatory) but t…

As a computer engineer, with an iron ring and a bachelor's of applied science, I feel your pain. In Canada, there seems to be some respect given to the title, although it seems to be waning. In the UK, an engineer is someone who fixes your car or appliances. In the USA, an engineer is someone who writes PHP.

Outside software, I'd say "engineers" are pretty well respected in the U.S., but I don't think it actually has any strong substantive connotation. An "engineering" job can range from some sort of strong meaning of the term, to something closer to "technician", which maybe is the non-computing analog of "programmer". There are plenty of, say, aerospace engineers, especially at the lower seniority levels, whose job mainly involves "running the numbers" in a fairly straightforward way, and not a lot of independent decision-making or problem-solving.

(Some places do distinguish "engineer" and "technician", but I don't think it's a strong boundary, and where it does exist, has more to do with formal credentials and pay grades than the actual job contents.)

Re: I am a programmer

#62

Post by jbondeson »

TheCapn wrote: post #52

The biggest quarrel I have with this whole debacle is how it all started out. A group of wise asses decided they should fancy their title up and now everyone has to "to stay relevant". The fact is I AM a Software Engineer. I have a degree in Applied Science and I have my Iron Ring. I am registered with my provincial Professional Body. Saying that, I am not just a "Programmer" (I do not mean to sound derogatory) but t…

Frankly, I dispute the existence of a "Software Engineer."

The UK and parts of Canada may recognize and regulate people with this title, but I don't believe that the same rigor _can_ be applied to building software.

You would have to work with formally verified (and I mean that in the mathematical sense) hardware and software all the way up and down the stack (that would include the language and compiler you utilize). You would then have to formally verify your own software on the stack you are deploying to. Only then would you be approaching the rigor that other Engineering professions are held to.

Re: I am a programmer

#63

Post by TheCapn »

tomcreighton wrote: post #59
TheCapn wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel that is the wrong way to approach things. Your job as a programmer was to provide that deliverable as set out by your position. You programmed it and it went along. The outcome of that deliverable was the improvement but your job was to construct it. I don't pretend that my past jobs were "automating IPTV interface interactions" or "enabling alternative business transaction venues"... I was programming what wa…

I think you're missing the point - saying "I'm a programmer" essentially means jack and squat to most people. Saying what you did, and better, what that actually accomplished in real world terms isn't a lie at all, it's what people actually care about.

I agree with you completely. I'm just being pissy and saying "I wish things were different" and I really don't have a productive solution to the problem... My wish is that programmers would take pride in the title and call themselves programmers who were able to accomplish X and Y for company Z and not the other way around where they hide the programmer bit.

Re: I am a programmer

#64

Post by TheCapn »

jbondeson wrote: post #62
TheCapn wrote: post #52

The biggest quarrel I have with this whole debacle is how it all started out. A group of wise asses decided they should fancy their title up and now everyone has to "to stay relevant". The fact is I AM a Software Engineer. I have a degree in Applied Science and I have my Iron Ring. I am registered with my provincial Professional Body. Saying that, I am not just a "Programmer" (I do not mean to sound derogatory) but t…

Frankly, I dispute the existence of a "Software Engineer." The UK and parts of Canada may recognize and regulate people with this title, but I don't believe that the same rigor _can_ be applied to building software. You would have to work with formally verified (and I mean that in the mathematical sense) hardware and software all the way up and down the stack (that would include the language and compiler you utilize)…

I guess I lied in part... I'm a Systems Engineer with a Software specialization. My work is about the integration of software components into a much larger architecture of devices... in my case I keep the internet backbone alive for my province that includes alarm monitoring, fault detection/correction and upkeep to systems for prevention. AI, formal methods and other broad categories are extremely relevant in my industry and I personally believe only a fool would discredit this as an Engineer's job.

Re: I am a programmer

#65

Post by mechanical_fish »

TheCapn wrote: post #55
DanielStraight wrote: post #40

Patrick's essay had nothing to do with titles. It was about describing what you do in terms of the benefit you provide to your customers/employers rather than in terms of the skills or tools you use to provide that benefit. I could tell people I can program Excel interop in .NET, or I could tell them I saved my company dozens of hours a week by automating an administrative process. To non-programmers, only one of the…

I feel that is the wrong way to approach things. Your job as a programmer was to provide that deliverable as set out by your position. You programmed it and it went along. The outcome of that deliverable was the improvement but your job was to construct it. I don't pretend that my past jobs were "automating IPTV interface interactions" or "enabling alternative business transaction venues"... I was programming what wa…

It is hard for those of us who know how to tinker to appreciate that there really are folks who don't tinker.

You assign them to pull the levers, and they pull the levers. If the machine they're running is manifestly inefficient, they don't notice, or they pretend not to notice.

(Or – if they're good – they adapt themselves, adopting a complex series of difficult physical and mental moves to compensate for the machine's brokenness. Sometimes those physical moves are such that, after four years on the job, they'll be in the hospital. But they do them anyway, because, hey, making the inefficient machine work is their job.)

If the machine next to theirs is broken in a way such that it messes up half of the work coming out of their machine, they just keep going -- hey, it's their job to run this machine, not that machine. If the machine they're running breaks down, they call for help and then sit there unmoving until help arrives. ("I didn't want to break anything.")

You tell them to RTFM, and they do, all of it, and then they come back to you: "I read the whole manual; now what do you want me to do?"

They may have even memorized the manual. It's not that these people aren't smart and eager to please. Indeed – and this is the thing I have trouble getting my head around – sometimes, within their area of expertise, they may know how to tinker like mad, they know the freaking serial numbers of every part of their machine and which ones can substitute for each other in an emergency. And yet, beyond their area, there's this strange paralysis. You hand them the duct tape and gesture encouragingly at a neighboring machine and... nothing happens.

If you give such a person a room full of miscellaneous broken things and ask them to fix everything they will proceed at a rate of (1 + epsilon) hour of progress per hour you spend telling them what to do. On the flip side, if you give them a room full of ten thousand widgets to finagle and they have a certification in Widget Finagling, those widgets will get finagled. They might even work overtime to please you. And when the widgets are done they'll go home, even if the rest of the factory is on fire, because there's nothing left for them to do.

When hiring someone to solve our problems we desperately need to know whether or not we're getting a hacker, or a technician. Both have their roles, but they can't substitute for each other.

Re: I am a programmer

#66

Post by TheCapn »

_delirium wrote: post #61
rcfox wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a computer engineer, with an iron ring and a bachelor's of applied science, I feel your pain. In Canada, there seems to be some respect given to the title, although it seems to be waning. In the UK, an engineer is someone who fixes your car or appliances. In the USA, an engineer is someone who writes PHP.

Outside software, I'd say "engineers" are pretty well respected in the U.S., but I don't think it actually has any strong substantive connotation. An "engineering" job can range from some sort of strong meaning of the term, to something closer to "technician", which maybe is the non-computing analog of "programmer". There are plenty of, say, aerospace engineers, especially at the lower seniority levels, whose job mai…

Where I'm from the real difference between Engineer and Technician is the amount of responsibility that is placed upon the professional's shoulders. I have lots of technician friends who complain about the work they do being the same as engineers but aren't paid in the same grade as we are.

I'm not sure whether or not I agree with them in this case but the reality that I keep seeing is the idea of "responsibility". The work that the technician does is passed through the engineer who puts his approval/stamp/whatever on it and puts it through production.

If something a technician did came through my desk and I approved it only to have it cost my client massive financial loss for a preventable reason it is MY ass that is on the line and not the technician. I could be a technician and not have that on me but that wasn't my decision and if an employer wants to retain competent engineers they need to pay them at an appropriate grade so that they're prepared to take that responsibility.

EDIT: I guess another thing is the academics that each goes through. Technicians mostly go through courses that teach reconstruction and following the spec while engineers are given a broad problem and time to solve it.

I'm not saying technicians are incapable of design, I'm just saying the schools my friends went through didn't teach it so it isn't really expected of them.

Re: I am a programmer

#67

Post by freemarketteddy »

Here is something constructive to take away from Patrick's essay.

If you work in a bureaucracy dont whine about code quality ,better testing etc coz guess what ...No one really gives a shit!

If you really want to do good work do where its actually going to matter.WORK ON OPEN SOURCE PROJECTS.

When you are at work.Keep in mind that the only thing the management cares about is increasing profits and cutting costs.So go ahead and make them the ugly PHP5 form that they want.It will take you very less time anyways.Spend the rest of the time working on open source projects.This is a complete win-win strategy.

Yes years later when your companies stock value is in single digits ,some people in upper management will maybe understand the value of good source control,good testing procedures etc.But guess what they are not going to give much of a shit even then.All they will care about even then is (Repeat After Me)"Increasing profit and reducing costs".

Re: I am a programmer

#68

Post by jbondeson »

TheCapn wrote: post #64
jbondeson wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly, I dispute the existence of a "Software Engineer." The UK and parts of Canada may recognize and regulate people with this title, but I don't believe that the same rigor _can_ be applied to building software. You would have to work with formally verified (and I mean that in the mathematical sense) hardware and software all the way up and down the stack (that would include the language and compiler you utilize)…

I guess I lied in part... I'm a Systems Engineer with a Software specialization. My work is about the integration of software components into a much larger architecture of devices... in my case I keep the internet backbone alive for my province that includes alarm monitoring, fault detection/correction and upkeep to systems for prevention. AI, formal methods and other broad categories are extremely relevant in my ind…

You're an Engineer who writes software, nothing wrong with that. Lots of Chemical and Electrical Engineers write software, I'm still not going to call them Software Engineers.

This isn't about discrediting anyone's life work. The fact is if you're developing software that gets deployed on anything but purpose-built hardware you're already not engaging in proper engineering practices. It would be like building a bridge with materials whose properties you didn't know.

Re: I am a programmer

#69

Post by [deleted] »

xiaoma wrote: post #27
akie wrote: post #17

I am a programmer, but I am not a programmer. The problem is, 'programming' as such is the end of a process. That process begins with talking to a customer about his or her idea/business problem, and asking questions and (basically) doing consulting to help the customer understand what his or her problem really is. Once that's clear, I write a proposal that outlines how I would address that problem, all in strictly h…

> And then, finally, three months since that first meeting, I can start with the programming. In my world (iOS), if it takes you three months to even start moving, you'll miss the market opportunities far too often. 3 months ago, iOS5 storyboarding and multitasking weren't even a concern and most developers were split between Xcode 3.x and 4.0!

[deleted]

Re: I am a programmer

#70

Post by rhizome31 »

akie wrote: post #24
rhizome31 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem is, 'programming' as such is the end of a process. In a lot of cases it's probably more accurate to say it's one part of the cycle. If programming really ends up being the end of the process, something might have gone wrong with the project.

Yeah ok ;-) The programming part itself is a whole different process, including a lot of communication with the customer. It is not really the end of the process in that sense - it's the last process in the big overarching process.

What I meant is just that after programming usually comes feedback, bug fixes, improvements, new features which need to be discussed, spec'd and developed and so on. In the sectors I've worked in (web and enterprise software), programming is part of an iterative process, so if the project is successful, it's not really the end of anything. It can be different in "heavier" sectors with projects that span over several years and that don't change much after the initial release.
Post reply on HN