Frank,

>In the meantime, I'm wary of any metrics that might be turned
>into dubious 'benchmarks of quality' or 'measures of goodness' or

The real reason to be wary of such things is because at the moment
they are usually based on nothing more than the chemical interaction
of the designers breakfast with the walls of his intestines (ie gut reaction).
I think psychology of programming researchers have something to
contribute here, if only they stopped studying how students used
languages that nobody in industry uses.

>somesuch thing, because it'll just be another excuse to avoid hiring
>and keeping good programmers.  If managers believe that they could
>take any old guff written by Joe I-Can-Spell-C, wave the patented
>'Software I.Q.' meter over it, and get better software every time,
>why should they spend time and money doing things like training
>or conducting decent technical interviews, or respecting the
>opinions of their software staff?

The programmers union would be proud of you.  Shareholders on the
other hand want maximum results for minimum cost.  If this means
hiring cheapo programmers and using tools to add polish to the final
product, so be it (provided it minimises cost).

Academics may be interested in the inner workings of the software
development process.  But the industrial application of this
knowledge is the reduction of costs, or being able to do things that
could not be done without it (products delivered more quickly, or
even larger products).

My argument is that there are so few good programmers that source
>>needs to be written so that it can be worked on by the not so good.
>
>So, good programmers must be forced to write code that poor programmers
>can understand?

Writing programs that poor programmers cannot understand should
be considered a sackable offence in some cases.

>I disagree.
>
>I think we need incentives to create *more* good programmers, not
>burdens that make it harder to become one.  I'm happy to see the
>not-so-good programmers abandon programming entirely because they
>find it too hard, or not enough fun,

Your wearing a shop stewards hat again.

> and I'd gleefully burn all
>the "Complete Idiot's Guide"-type books that encourage the idea
>that we need more complete idiots doing programming.

I find the 'Idiots guides' rather good.  The use of this title in books
has been trademarked and the owners work to a formula.  They
hire people to distill the essence of a subject, simplify it and then
write a readable book.  It is the 'Learn to XXX in 21 days'  books
that need to be burned.

>Tools that might help in the organisation of software must still be
>subject to the judgement of the programmers, rather than override it.
>Otherwise, software development will get *worse*, because people who
>know what they're doing will leave the field to the Joe I-Can-Spell-C's
>and their wonderful whiz-bang Metrics of Quality that they don't
>understand.  I do not want this to happen, and neither do you.

We are both programmers and want to enhance the status of our
profession.

Yes, automated tools will remove the need for 'good' programmers.
But the purpose of software development is not to create a cadre
of good programmers, but to make money for their employers.

The problem is at the moment we have neither the automated tools (that
work as advertised) or the good programmers (who are as good as they
claim).

If psychology of programmer researchers were a bit more in tune with
these capitalist goals they might find their research more widely used
within industry.  They might also find it easier to get funding for projects.


derek

--
Derek M Jones                                           tel: +44 (0) 1252 520 667
Knowledge Software Ltd                            mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Applications Standards Conformance Testing   http://www.knosof.co.uk



- Automatic footer for [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]  unsubscribe discuss
To join the announcements list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] subscribe announce
To receive a help file, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]         help
This list is archived at http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss%40ppig.org/
If you have any problems or questions, please mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to