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

Things I’ve learned in my 20 years as a software engineer

simplethread.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

631–640 of 745 posts

Re: Things I’ve learned in my 20 years as a software engineer

#631

Post by yibg »

karaterobot wrote: post #285
quadcore wrote: post #96

The 10x programmer is a silly myth. The idea that someone can produce in 1 day what another competent, hard working, similarly experienced programmer can produce in 2 weeks is silly. You know, 10x is an optimistic number here. Some programmers will do in 1 day what you wont achieve in a life time. And not understanding that makes you a bad programmer by my book simply because this is the foundation of the job. So let…

When you say "[s]ome programmers will do in 1 day what you wont achieve in a life time" you are no longer talking about the 10X programmer myth. You're talking about invention, rather than day-to-day productivity.

How does the invention happen if not through day to day productivity?

Re: Things I’ve learned in my 20 years as a software engineer

#632

Post by grog454 »

koonsolo wrote: post #31
Annatar wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I reached quite the opposite conclusion: the purpose of software is to make a computer do work. Then again, I purposely refrain from writing end-user software and focus on backend automation. It is a deliberate choice.

Do you keep your code human readable? Why?

Just playing devil's advocate:

So I or someone else can continue to effectively make the computer do work.

Re: Things I’ve learned in my 20 years as a software engineer

#633

Post by pksebben »

diob wrote: post #629
pksebben wrote: post #623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding this issue of "innate" talent, I want to ask, how do you know? there are just so many variables that go into human cognition. Belief. Drive. Focus. Grit. Exposure to ideas. Social support. Physical resources. Exercise. Health. Each of these contribute, in some way, to every moment we spend learning. They are always changing. Each moment we learn affects the outcome of the next. It's Conway's game of life in…

They've done some pretty extensive studies on ability / achievement. The big driver being parents wanting to ensure their kids turn out great, or to make their kids smart. Turns out environment can only really have _detrimental_ effects on outcomes for kids. You can't increase what they don't have, but you definitely can fuck them up. I thought it was pretty interesting. So basically, the advice most parents get now…

Can you link to these? I'm interested in what they found out, if a little skeptical about how thinking can be precisely measured.

Re: Things I’ve learned in my 20 years as a software engineer

#634

Post by jhrmnn »

pksebben wrote: post #623
gavinray wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, I don't know why the industry (or people?) in general have a problem with accepting this abilities gap. It's as if the notion of people being arbitrarily born more or less with a knack for something is evil. Let me tell you the story of when I realized I was (at best), a "not-mediocre" dev: 1. I've been programming for fun even as a kid. That's what got me into it: If you count kid-programming as "programming…

Regarding this issue of "innate" talent, I want to ask, how do you know? there are just so many variables that go into human cognition. Belief. Drive. Focus. Grit. Exposure to ideas. Social support. Physical resources. Exercise. Health. Each of these contribute, in some way, to every moment we spend learning. They are always changing. Each moment we learn affects the outcome of the next. It's Conway's game of life in…

It’s probably not important whether the talent is encoded in someone’s DNA or whether it was formed during their childhood and early education they got. But by the time people are teenagers, there can be large differences in learning ability that are impossible to level anymore. You can push through those differences through “belief, drive, focus, grit,” etc, but the baselines are different.

Re: Things I’ve learned in my 20 years as a software engineer

#635

Post by pksebben »

jhrmnn wrote: post #634
pksebben wrote: post #623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding this issue of "innate" talent, I want to ask, how do you know? there are just so many variables that go into human cognition. Belief. Drive. Focus. Grit. Exposure to ideas. Social support. Physical resources. Exercise. Health. Each of these contribute, in some way, to every moment we spend learning. They are always changing. Each moment we learn affects the outcome of the next. It's Conway's game of life in…

It’s probably not important whether the talent is encoded in someone’s DNA or whether it was formed during their childhood and early education they got. But by the time people are teenagers, there can be large differences in learning ability that are impossible to level anymore. You can push through those differences through “belief, drive, focus, grit,” etc, but the baselines are different.

there are differences between any two people anywhere ever, though. Is there some reason that being over 20 means you're done developing?

Re: Things I’ve learned in my 20 years as a software engineer

#636

Post by yibg »

BeetleB wrote: post #417
WizzleKake wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 10x programmer doesn't cost 10 times as much as a regular programmer. 10x programmers are real and drive real business value. The people who insist 10x programmers are a myth simply have not worked with one. Do not conflate brilliant-but-an-asshole or prodigious-output-but-creates-a-mess programmers with 10x programmers.

Yet another comment that uses the phrase 10x but does not provide any way to quantify it. No one is disputing geniuses exist. Calling them 10x, however, is problematic.

The problem is value and productivity in software (or any creative space) is hard to quantify in general. How much better is the best engineer you’ve worked with compared to the worst? 2x? 1.5x? How do you quantify that? But you know one is significantly better than the other I assume.

If you want to replace 10x with “much much better”, then ok. But the general idea is the same. Some engineers produce an outsized impact compared to their peers.

Re: Things I’ve learned in my 20 years as a software engineer

#637

Post by throwaway984393 »

> 20. Always strive to build a smaller system

K.I.S.S. is a great principle, but inexperienced devs really have no way to understand what is small/simple and what isn't.

If you find yourself doing 3 unrelated things before you can finally get to the one thing you were meant to be doing, it's probably already too complicated. If you build it really simple, it can look under-designed, or inefficient, or out of date. But if you find yourself thinking, "this would be better if it were a little bit more complicated", you might have just hit the sweet spot.

Re: Things I’ve learned in my 20 years as a software engineer

#638

Post by Too »

alerighi wrote: post #506
bingohbangoh wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was some tweet recently that went "Saying 10x engineers don't exist is as true as saying 10x basketball players don't exist or that all writers are basically the same." It's self-evidently not true.

No. It's like saying that a good mechanic can fix a car 10 times faster than another. Even if a good mechanic manages to find the problem in less time than a non experienced one, he still has to do the repair. That is similar to programming: even if you have everything clear in your head, you know how to do every single thing that is written in the requirements of the program, you still have to type it out. A lot of…

F1 mechanics changes tires in 2 seconds. For my local workshop it takes an hour. That's like 1000x.

Bad analogies aside, as others already pointed out, the biggest gain is usually on more creative and architectural tasks with amplified impact, where the requirements given are not as clear as code. Not how fast you change a bolt or type 100LOC. Instead, for example choosing the right tools instead of reinventing your own, or writing a composable interface that enables integration with other tools instead of of an unmaintainable spaghetti monstrosity.

Re: Things I’ve learned in my 20 years as a software engineer

#639

Post by [deleted] »

pksebben wrote: post #623
gavinray wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, I don't know why the industry (or people?) in general have a problem with accepting this abilities gap. It's as if the notion of people being arbitrarily born more or less with a knack for something is evil. Let me tell you the story of when I realized I was (at best), a "not-mediocre" dev: 1. I've been programming for fun even as a kid. That's what got me into it: If you count kid-programming as "programming…

Regarding this issue of "innate" talent, I want to ask, how do you know? there are just so many variables that go into human cognition. Belief. Drive. Focus. Grit. Exposure to ideas. Social support. Physical resources. Exercise. Health. Each of these contribute, in some way, to every moment we spend learning. They are always changing. Each moment we learn affects the outcome of the next. It's Conway's game of life in…

[deleted]

Re: Things I’ve learned in my 20 years as a software engineer

#640

Post by jhrmnn »

pksebben wrote: post #635
jhrmnn wrote: post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s probably not important whether the talent is encoded in someone’s DNA or whether it was formed during their childhood and early education they got. But by the time people are teenagers, there can be large differences in learning ability that are impossible to level anymore. You can push through those differences through “belief, drive, focus, grit,” etc, but the baselines are different.

there are differences between any two people anywhere ever, though. Is there some reason that being over 20 means you're done developing?

You can learn a new foreign language when you’re 20. But it’s way easier when you’re 10 or 5. Same goes for learning to play chess, to code, and more broadly, for learning to learn.
Post reply on HN