Re: Programming is not a craft

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Chris Morris <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> Anyone care to discuss Dan North's blog post on this?
>
> http://dannorth.net/2011/01/11/programming-is-not-a-craft/
>
> It's a topic of interest with me. Not everything in Dan's post stuck, but I
> can't quite put my finger on it.
>


This seems like quibbling over definitions to me.

Personally, I see this as a range of possibilities, with two extremes.

There's the "computer scientist" on one end (I'm thinking of those people at
NASA who are dead-set on proving that their programs are correct). And the
"primadona artist" on the other who can't possibly commit his changes to
source control, because they just aren't quite right yet.

I'm sure other scales will occur to other people.

In between, I can see a huge difference between the "trades" types (like
plumbers, different levels of carpenters, masons, you name it...standardized
industry where we have thousands of years of experience that scientists are
just starting to explain) and the "crafts" types (quilting, embroidery,
knitting, etc) that just don't really qualify as "art," and aren't anywhere
near as standardized.

Most programming projects are juggling details to find some happy medium
between those two "extremes."

e.g. Several years back, I had to connect to a credit bureau, over a modem,
using their proprietary binary interface. Then convince that to talk with an
interface that was at least pretty enough our customers wouldn't as excuse
to assault me in armed rebellion.

Personally, I've decided to describe myself as a "craftsman" because I
figure that puts me in the same category as a guy who lays shingles.

Which, in most ways, seems about right. Except that I don't work outside.

Respectfully,
James