Never judge a programmer by their commit history(mehdi-khalili.com)
mehdi-khalili.com
Never judge a programmer by their commit history
http://www.mehdi-khalili.com/never-judge-a-programmer-by-their-commit-history#.UwiURItePPo.hackernews
11 comments
Really depends on the language and paradigm you're using, but the general aim for writing good code is to aim for loose coupling, high cohesion, don't repeat yourself, the single responsibility principle, and the Open/Closed principle (and several other philosophies) in order to maximize code re-usability and reduce maintenance effort.
You should aim to use whatever features your language provides to attempt to enforce the above, by information hiding, encapsulation, avoiding global mutable state as much as possible, and using design patterns to achieve a good balance.
You could give two similarly experienced programmers a fairly trivial problem and they might come up with wildly different solutions, because the best solution is a myth, but we know the wrong solution if we see it (that comes from the experience of making the same mistakes.)
If you give details on the language(s) you're using I may be able to point you to some literature on good design.
You should aim to use whatever features your language provides to attempt to enforce the above, by information hiding, encapsulation, avoiding global mutable state as much as possible, and using design patterns to achieve a good balance.
You could give two similarly experienced programmers a fairly trivial problem and they might come up with wildly different solutions, because the best solution is a myth, but we know the wrong solution if we see it (that comes from the experience of making the same mistakes.)
If you give details on the language(s) you're using I may be able to point you to some literature on good design.
Sorry for the late reply.
Recently, mostly Python and Javascript
Recently, mostly Python and Javascript
[deleted](1)
Good post but why is your name in the title?
Most likely it's because the script being used to submit this auto-included the pages title, which includes his name.
Considering that the official HN submit script† does this, it's an honest mistake.
† http://ycombinator.com/bookmarklet.html
Considering that the official HN submit script† does this, it's an honest mistake.
† http://ycombinator.com/bookmarklet.html
It's AddThis. Fixed. Thanks guys.
Sorry for being an asshole about it. I deleted my comment.
Not at all. The post was published by AddThis and I didn't realize the issue. I am glad it was highlighted so I could fix it sooner than later. Thanks.
Thank you!
If I can't judge you by your code, how should I judge you? Now, that's not to say that I shouldn't take other things into consideration, like your experience at the time. Obviously I'd never expect a junior dev's code to look like someone with 10 years experience. And yes, if you're working at a place with terrible coding standards, and for some reason I have access to that code (most of the time those places aren't producing open source code), you can explain why everything is static public or whatever. That's fine. It's not like you can't still write good code that is static public... show me how you write code that is still clear and concise and isolated etc etc even within the restrictions of the coding standards.
Definitely, you can and should tack on some personal information about the circumstances around the code you show to people. I have stuff in github that is half-baked. No big deal. Instead, I say "here, this is an example of my work that I consider to be high quality, and is an example of the code I would write for you if given the chance. That other repo is just some stuff I was messing around with, and I never fully put in the time to make it correct, because it was just a proof of concept."
And as for personal issues.... sorry, but this is life, and you might have those when you're working for my company. And I need you to be able to at least do an acceptable job regardless.
I'm hiring a coder. I'm going to look at your code. Just like if I'm hiring a cabinet maker, I'm going to look at his cabinets. If he says "sorry I was tired that week" and shows me crappy cabinets, I'm going to worry that he might be tired on the week he builds my cabinets.
Definitely, you can and should tack on some personal information about the circumstances around the code you show to people. I have stuff in github that is half-baked. No big deal. Instead, I say "here, this is an example of my work that I consider to be high quality, and is an example of the code I would write for you if given the chance. That other repo is just some stuff I was messing around with, and I never fully put in the time to make it correct, because it was just a proof of concept."
And as for personal issues.... sorry, but this is life, and you might have those when you're working for my company. And I need you to be able to at least do an acceptable job regardless.
I'm hiring a coder. I'm going to look at your code. Just like if I'm hiring a cabinet maker, I'm going to look at his cabinets. If he says "sorry I was tired that week" and shows me crappy cabinets, I'm going to worry that he might be tired on the week he builds my cabinets.
I work for ThoughtWorks and here is how they hire: http://www.mehdi-khalili.com/joining-thoughtworks It's a pretty involved process but the result is relatively flawless.
Like you I love to look at code and IMO that's where OSS (Open Source Software) shines because people contribute to OSS when they feel passionate; so that should be a good indicator. I also get candidates to submit coding puzzles and later get them to change it while I am looking over their shoulders!
RE "I need you to be able to at least do an acceptable job regardless" Until recently I thought I can always write awesome code; but it's not until we're brought down to our knees that we appreciate how personal issues could impact everything in our lives.
Like you I love to look at code and IMO that's where OSS (Open Source Software) shines because people contribute to OSS when they feel passionate; so that should be a good indicator. I also get candidates to submit coding puzzles and later get them to change it while I am looking over their shoulders!
RE "I need you to be able to at least do an acceptable job regardless" Until recently I thought I can always write awesome code; but it's not until we're brought down to our knees that we appreciate how personal issues could impact everything in our lives.
Besides some publicity, partly due to key person's popular books/blog I believe, why is ThoughtWorks special? I mean, isn't it just yet another enterprise/CRUD app development shop?
Note that I rather specifically said "acceptable" code. That means "not good, but not terrible". Acceptable can be mediocre. But it shouldn't ever be bad.
Well that's vague. Defined "acceptable"?
I did - mediocre. Neither excellent nor terrible.
You didn't. I'm looking for specific examples of what you consider "mediocre" code. I'd love to be able to understand what you this is to you - given it is so subjective.
Upon thinking about it... I think it's actually what I said to start - neither good nor terrible. Defining good and terrible code is easier than defining mediocre code, so we can do it by process of elimination. Mediocre code isn't terrible, but it's not good code either.
So, what is good code? Testable and well-tested, modular, isolated, easy to read, robust, performant...
What is terrible code? Well, the opposite of that, but generally there are some key indicators - code that breaks badly in edge cases, code that is impossible to read, code that entangles itself in a lot of other code, code that is hard to test.
So, mediocre code would be something that has some of the properties of good code, but is missing a few of the more important ones... maybe the tests aren't fully baked, maybe there are some inefficiencies, maybe it's a little harder to read than it could be, maybe it's not quite as isolated from the rest of the code as one might like.
The difference between mediocre and bad is the number of subpar things and their severity. If there are no tests, that's bad. If the code is horribly entangled with unrelated code, that's bad. If it's N cubed time in a place where we expect to handle large amounts of data, that's bad. If it ignores several common edge cases that will have really bad effects, that's bad.
It is subjective, but it's not entirely opinion, either.
So, what is good code? Testable and well-tested, modular, isolated, easy to read, robust, performant...
What is terrible code? Well, the opposite of that, but generally there are some key indicators - code that breaks badly in edge cases, code that is impossible to read, code that entangles itself in a lot of other code, code that is hard to test.
So, mediocre code would be something that has some of the properties of good code, but is missing a few of the more important ones... maybe the tests aren't fully baked, maybe there are some inefficiencies, maybe it's a little harder to read than it could be, maybe it's not quite as isolated from the rest of the code as one might like.
The difference between mediocre and bad is the number of subpar things and their severity. If there are no tests, that's bad. If the code is horribly entangled with unrelated code, that's bad. If it's N cubed time in a place where we expect to handle large amounts of data, that's bad. If it ignores several common edge cases that will have really bad effects, that's bad.
It is subjective, but it's not entirely opinion, either.
Context matters with code was the point, not necessarily the code itself in isolation. We've all written bad code due to time hacks or bad architecture/bad code elsewhere.
Also, if you don't try to keep your developers happy when something happens, even good developers, they can easily jump ship to another company that does & maybe even get paid better - health issues are nothing to be trifled with, they happen to everyone & good companies will give time off for such for good reason. Even the military with its notorious overworking of people makes sure people have ample time off to recover from illnesses before making an action.
It's by far a pro-developer's job market - I'm looking at about a $70k+ raise in income + stock options over the past 6-7 months with little more than 1 year of experience (from entry level pay & no CS classes in education). If craziness like that can happen, you should beware pushing your developers in the wrong ways since jumping is an attractive option.
Also, if you don't try to keep your developers happy when something happens, even good developers, they can easily jump ship to another company that does & maybe even get paid better - health issues are nothing to be trifled with, they happen to everyone & good companies will give time off for such for good reason. Even the military with its notorious overworking of people makes sure people have ample time off to recover from illnesses before making an action.
It's by far a pro-developer's job market - I'm looking at about a $70k+ raise in income + stock options over the past 6-7 months with little more than 1 year of experience (from entry level pay & no CS classes in education). If craziness like that can happen, you should beware pushing your developers in the wrong ways since jumping is an attractive option.
Excellent point, it's definitely the context that matters. To me the article is arguing "code is not written in a vacuum" rather than literally "don't judge coders by their code."
This reminds me of the fundamental attribution error[1]. We tend to attribute the motivation behind our own behavior to context we are in, whereas we tend to attribute the behavior of others to internal characteristics.
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error
This reminds me of the fundamental attribution error[1]. We tend to attribute the motivation behind our own behavior to context we are in, whereas we tend to attribute the behavior of others to internal characteristics.
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error
Nailed it.
If the only code somebody shows is code they make excuses for, that's a red flag, but shit does happen in life and if you're not the type of boss who can deal with that, then you're not the type of boss I want to be working for.
I didn't say shit never happens. Of course, take time off, work shifted hours, do what you need to do. But don't check in shit code and then make excuses. Crappy code is worse than no code at all.
By height, of course. ;-)
Seriously, though, although I think OP overstates it a bit, the point is a good one. When we are paid to code, part of the deal is that we can be required to produce code that is arbitrarily bad, as judged by our own lights. I've certainly been in situations where I was compelled to commit code, in my own name, that I felt was atrocious. You might argue that I should have resigned instead, but when you have a family things are not that simple. (Yes, I did leave with all practical haste, but at my level this can take a while.)
I do judge programmers somewhat by their commits. But I am careful to consider the context, especially parts that might not be immediately obvious. If you see something that looks bad, though, don't just ass. Instead, ask the person about it. What's their opinion of it? What's their opinion of the project as a whole and how it was run? And listen carefully, as standard practice (at least in the US) is to avoid disparaging prior work situations.
Seriously, though, although I think OP overstates it a bit, the point is a good one. When we are paid to code, part of the deal is that we can be required to produce code that is arbitrarily bad, as judged by our own lights. I've certainly been in situations where I was compelled to commit code, in my own name, that I felt was atrocious. You might argue that I should have resigned instead, but when you have a family things are not that simple. (Yes, I did leave with all practical haste, but at my level this can take a while.)
I do judge programmers somewhat by their commits. But I am careful to consider the context, especially parts that might not be immediately obvious. If you see something that looks bad, though, don't just ass. Instead, ask the person about it. What's their opinion of it? What's their opinion of the project as a whole and how it was run? And listen carefully, as standard practice (at least in the US) is to avoid disparaging prior work situations.
> By height, of course. ;-)
Nonono, that's how we judge managers and executives. We judge programmers by their hair.
Nonono, that's how we judge managers and executives. We judge programmers by their hair.
> If I can't judge you by your code, how should I judge you?
I judge a programmer by the contributions he or she has made to various open source projects. Now that sounds like judging by code, right? Well only partly. Other things that matter is how many projects someone has committed to, what the people of the project teams say, etc.
The thing is I can't know the context looking at the code. What I can do is look at how successful the open source projects are and what their co-committers have to say. Now, usually the co-committers will say something positive, but what they say is important.
I judge a programmer by the contributions he or she has made to various open source projects. Now that sounds like judging by code, right? Well only partly. Other things that matter is how many projects someone has committed to, what the people of the project teams say, etc.
The thing is I can't know the context looking at the code. What I can do is look at how successful the open source projects are and what their co-committers have to say. Now, usually the co-committers will say something positive, but what they say is important.
So how would you judge someone like me who has no open source projects? Work stuff is in house, and I don't have the time outside of work to contribute anything meaningful.
Do you use any open source libraries at work? Are they flawed? Write good bug reports and get involved in the community. It's not building up a patch portfolio (I should trademark that) but it shows that you're paying attention and care about quality.
Python libraries are usually rock solid. Perl modules in CPAN before that. Now I have been playing with Javascript recently, and that is a whole different story. Unfortunately my JS isn't good enough to improve what has been done.
Recently I had to hack the Django test runner, so I could use a copy of my prod database. I hacked it enough to do what I wanted, but I know that releasing that would probably cause people as many problems as it solved, giving them false hope in a solution that worked on my machine with my setup.
I had initially though it would be something the community would want (having googled around to get a solution), but the fact is, to do it an a quality way (one that I would expect to solve more problems than it creates for the average user) would take significantly longer. I don't wnt to pollute good quality projects like Django with crap hacks. I will however be happy to write a blog post or stack overflow answer explaining what I did and how someone else can do the same - with the full understanding it is a bit of a hack, and may or may not affect.
(I have put in the occasional bug report. Am I being too much of a perfectionist for the open source community, assuming that crap code is not better than no code?)
Recently I had to hack the Django test runner, so I could use a copy of my prod database. I hacked it enough to do what I wanted, but I know that releasing that would probably cause people as many problems as it solved, giving them false hope in a solution that worked on my machine with my setup.
I had initially though it would be something the community would want (having googled around to get a solution), but the fact is, to do it an a quality way (one that I would expect to solve more problems than it creates for the average user) would take significantly longer. I don't wnt to pollute good quality projects like Django with crap hacks. I will however be happy to write a blog post or stack overflow answer explaining what I did and how someone else can do the same - with the full understanding it is a bit of a hack, and may or may not affect.
(I have put in the occasional bug report. Am I being too much of a perfectionist for the open source community, assuming that crap code is not better than no code?)
Don't worry about not having made many or even any open source code contributions. You probably don't want to work for or with any person or any organization that will judge you negatively based on that.
True open source software development is about sharing code because you want to do so. It's not about crafting reams and reams of crappy JavaScript or Ruby code just to be able to claim to be a "prolific contributor", or to brag about having made a large number of GitHub pull requests.
Writing closed-source code that solves real problems is more valuable and important than writing open source software that only serves to stroke one's ego.
True open source software development is about sharing code because you want to do so. It's not about crafting reams and reams of crappy JavaScript or Ruby code just to be able to claim to be a "prolific contributor", or to brag about having made a large number of GitHub pull requests.
Writing closed-source code that solves real problems is more valuable and important than writing open source software that only serves to stroke one's ego.
All of the companies I have ever worked for directly or indirectly disallow open-source contributions through employment IP agreements. If you are working for somebody else in technology world, there is a good chance that you also have signed such an agreement already.
Yea. That is not to say we (generally people working for such companies) don't contribute to open source, it's just not gonna look like it's coming from you. We will routinely file internal bug reports on our open source tools, but our stuff is tweaked a bit. Also some of the open source stuff we use is actually developed 90% in house and open sourced by US - you'll definitely never see our contributions or bug reports then, because it's all done on our internal codebase & tools.
I would prefer to hire people I know than those who don't, but if you have worked on successful, related projects then I would ask for references including co-worker/developer references.
Interesting perspective. I both write code, and contribute fixes. I've had my code end up in screen, emacs, and other tools that people use but I've virtually never advertised that.
(To be honest I've probably lost track of projects that have taken a one-line bugfix/fixup, and if you put me on the spot I'd probably struggle to recall even the biggies.)
(To be honest I've probably lost track of projects that have taken a one-line bugfix/fixup, and if you put me on the spot I'd probably struggle to recall even the biggies.)
That's the kind of contribution I do (plus some translations). I don't even have it written down because it's so minuscule compared with the work people do on those projects I don't think it merits attention.
[deleted]
A developer should be judged by does it work and not fail that often (and fail in safe ways) - I dont care how "purty" the code is.
I can recall when using mixed case in your FORTRAN IV Hollerith statements was considered a bit flash.
I can recall when using mixed case in your FORTRAN IV Hollerith statements was considered a bit flash.
Good code is more than how it looks. Is it fault tolerant? Does it handle edge cases? Does it scale? Does it lend itself to being tested? Does it lend itself to being extended? Is it legible by other coders for when they inevitably need to fix bugs and/or refactor / extend it?
"it works" is actually a very small part of good code, since implementation is usually dwarfed by maintenance and extension.
Note, none of what I mentioned is about clever or "purty" code.
"it works" is actually a very small part of good code, since implementation is usually dwarfed by maintenance and extension.
Note, none of what I mentioned is about clever or "purty" code.
But I bet my code that was the core of one of BT's billing systems (and sold world wide) would not be perceived as very good quality.
[deleted]
It's definitely true. People don't really understand the circumstances the coder was in when writing the code.
I sometimes come across low paying clients who try to take advantage of you at every chance. They also come to me with hosting and have even changed hosts without even asking me while having no tech knowledge (then call me to fix the million errors they have).
For these clients I usually just throw together some fast low quality hand rolled PHP sites if they are not very demanding sites. There won't be tests, I'll haphazardly inline some CSS because when you get paid almost nothing the last thing you're thinking about is wonderful to work with abstractions that are maintainable.
You're only thinking about getting the job done as fast as possible and getting out because you have no interest in doing business with them again and due to their personality you don't want to be recommended to their friends.
If you compare that code to the code I write for my own side projects or proper clients it's night and day. You wouldn't even know they are the same person.
I sometimes come across low paying clients who try to take advantage of you at every chance. They also come to me with hosting and have even changed hosts without even asking me while having no tech knowledge (then call me to fix the million errors they have).
For these clients I usually just throw together some fast low quality hand rolled PHP sites if they are not very demanding sites. There won't be tests, I'll haphazardly inline some CSS because when you get paid almost nothing the last thing you're thinking about is wonderful to work with abstractions that are maintainable.
You're only thinking about getting the job done as fast as possible and getting out because you have no interest in doing business with them again and due to their personality you don't want to be recommended to their friends.
If you compare that code to the code I write for my own side projects or proper clients it's night and day. You wouldn't even know they are the same person.
I contributed a fix to something on github, making one function signature which required 'options' have them optional like all the other functions.
Repeated throughout the code base was some copypasta. I dutifully committed more copypasta.
Repeated throughout the code base was some copypasta. I dutifully committed more copypasta.
Yeah, that reminds me of the broken window tip from the pragmatic programmer book.
Applying Pareto's rule to your client list might help improve your life's happiness and hourly rate tremendously. Saying that you need to do bad work because your clients don't pay you well enough is a quite bad excuse.
It's not as simple as you think it is.
A lot of them already use shared hosting from previous sites and want to stay with them because it happens to work in their case.
So now you're stuck using some old version of PHP and mysql. What if you haven't bothered spending a ton of time with PHP lately and for the last few years you've been working with node and rails on projects you deem "worthy"?
Should I spend dozens of hours researching best practices for an obsolete version of PHP and make sure I do it right? Or should I lecture someone on reasons why they should allow me to host their site somewhere else and then setup a VPS for them? No frikken way.
Also when you need money, you accept work. That is how the world works. For some people/situations it's not worth throwing away $400 on some job because of annoying clients. You deal with it and put the money in your bank.
A lot of them already use shared hosting from previous sites and want to stay with them because it happens to work in their case.
So now you're stuck using some old version of PHP and mysql. What if you haven't bothered spending a ton of time with PHP lately and for the last few years you've been working with node and rails on projects you deem "worthy"?
Should I spend dozens of hours researching best practices for an obsolete version of PHP and make sure I do it right? Or should I lecture someone on reasons why they should allow me to host their site somewhere else and then setup a VPS for them? No frikken way.
Also when you need money, you accept work. That is how the world works. For some people/situations it's not worth throwing away $400 on some job because of annoying clients. You deal with it and put the money in your bank.
It's nice when acronyms, such as "TDD" and "BDD" here, are expanded at least once in the text when they first occur -- I don't think it would put a lot of burden on writers. There is too much of these insider knowledge acronyms all over the internet nowadays.
Anyways... I gather "TDD" means "Test-Driven Development" and "BDD" means "Behavior-Driven Development".
Anyways... I gather "TDD" means "Test-Driven Development" and "BDD" means "Behavior-Driven Development".
What the hell is behaviour driven development? Everyone has some sort of behaviour, so it sounds as if everyone must be practising it.
Recently I spotted a new one, domain driven development. I decided to read up on it and realised this is how I had been taught to design code, and how I generally go about doing things. Its got a name now.
Recently I spotted a new one, domain driven development. I decided to read up on it and realised this is how I had been taught to design code, and how I generally go about doing things. Its got a name now.
Test driven development with silly/vague method names, like it() and should(), often written by people who don't write the code so behaviour can be defined separately from implementation.
It was quite popular in the ruby community a couple of years ago.
It was quite popular in the ruby community a couple of years ago.
I have explained Behavior Driven Development and its benefits here http://www.mehdi-khalili.com/bdd-to-the-rescue.
Hope it helps.
Hope it helps.
Thanks for that but to be honest it just sound like more of the same, but viewed from a different angle.
My understanding of your write up is that that tests may be written without understanding the problem. I mean that is just dumb TDD religious zealots who would do that sort of thing, assuming that test make up for design (and thought process). I also think that the verification process is an inherent part of waterfall model - hence the iterations.
My understanding of your write up is that that tests may be written without understanding the problem. I mean that is just dumb TDD religious zealots who would do that sort of thing, assuming that test make up for design (and thought process). I also think that the verification process is an inherent part of waterfall model - hence the iterations.
Fair comment. I actually do that very often (e.g. CI and CD in http://www.mehdi-khalili.com/continuous-integration-delivery...).
I guess the reason I didn't do it for BDD was that I have written a lot of posts about Behavior/Test Driven Development and incorrectly assumed that my readers know about that. My mistake. It's fixed now. Thanks.
I guess the reason I didn't do it for BDD was that I have written a lot of posts about Behavior/Test Driven Development and incorrectly assumed that my readers know about that. My mistake. It's fixed now. Thanks.
He missed the biggest reason, which is that projects are often coded quickly to just "get it working" in a fast time frame.
yep. I look back at some bits of my own code and realise they are a mess. If it needs changed anyway, and I have time, I'll use the "fresh look" at my code to decide what is wrong with it, and what could be better. Refactor from there.
Another one would be constantly changing requirements. So you start with something nice. Add a quick hack to do a little more. Rinse, repeat, until it becomes an unmaintainable mess.
Another one would be constantly changing requirements. So you start with something nice. Add a quick hack to do a little more. Rinse, repeat, until it becomes an unmaintainable mess.
That was in the MVP (minimum viable product) section. I also referred to an old post of mine, on bad code http://www.mehdi-khalili.com/bad-code, where I explain that in great details. I hope you find that useful.
I think this could be shortened to 'Never judge a programmer'.
Seriously though, outside of an interview environment or training, why are we trying to assess people's capabilities anyway?
This kind of penis-measuring contest is so prevalent in our industry; it makes people incredibly afraid of actually putting themselves out there and helping to create. Judging other people is a bad trait. Simple as that.
Seriously though, outside of an interview environment or training, why are we trying to assess people's capabilities anyway?
This kind of penis-measuring contest is so prevalent in our industry; it makes people incredibly afraid of actually putting themselves out there and helping to create. Judging other people is a bad trait. Simple as that.
So if people are continuously creating unmaintainable messes and technical debt we should just throw up our hands and say "oh well, we shouldn't judge"? Assessing capabilities is required for improvement. If someone is creating poor quality work we can either replace them or train them to do better. But if we can't assess them then we won't know when to do either one.
I am coming to the conclusion now that actually talking to a programmer is the best way to judge.
I have had various interviews in the last couple of years. One I got offered the job without so much as any technical test, based on my CV. I almost felt a bit cheated there, as I wanted to prove I was good. I interviewed for a startup with non technical founders. They had pulled a Python test from the internet which seemed 90% about lambdas in Python (I can use them, but in most cases list comprehensions provide a more readable syntax).
I actually like being able to explain my thought process in an interview. Even if I don't get it right, then they may see that I am "almost there". Likewise if I don't know something, I can tell them.
I have a fair idea about my colleges work, not from their code, but by the way they talk about it, and seeing the tools they use. (The "best" in my office of 4 chooses Java for most of his stuff for some reason - not what I would expect from someone good. The worst code was written by someone who ranted about how I should be choosing Python over Perl.)
I have had various interviews in the last couple of years. One I got offered the job without so much as any technical test, based on my CV. I almost felt a bit cheated there, as I wanted to prove I was good. I interviewed for a startup with non technical founders. They had pulled a Python test from the internet which seemed 90% about lambdas in Python (I can use them, but in most cases list comprehensions provide a more readable syntax).
I actually like being able to explain my thought process in an interview. Even if I don't get it right, then they may see that I am "almost there". Likewise if I don't know something, I can tell them.
I have a fair idea about my colleges work, not from their code, but by the way they talk about it, and seeing the tools they use. (The "best" in my office of 4 chooses Java for most of his stuff for some reason - not what I would expect from someone good. The worst code was written by someone who ranted about how I should be choosing Python over Perl.)
We need to assess people's capabilities so we can try to allocate our resources as best as we can, especially when facing changing circumstances and limited budgets.
When assigning work, I need to know if one programmer is likely better than another at a given task. If Dave tends to work more efficiently with C++ than Gupta does, I'm going to give the C++ work to Dave. If Gupta tends to work more efficiently with Visual Basic than Dave does, then I'm going to have Gupta maintain the old Visual Basic apps.
This is business. We're here to allocate our resources, be they money or people, as best as we can in order to get the greatest return. Professional programmers will set aside their emotions in order to achieve this goal, and will accept being judged as part of the resource allocation process. They realize that this isn't some fantasy where everybody is happy all of the time, and nobody's feelings get hurt.
When assigning work, I need to know if one programmer is likely better than another at a given task. If Dave tends to work more efficiently with C++ than Gupta does, I'm going to give the C++ work to Dave. If Gupta tends to work more efficiently with Visual Basic than Dave does, then I'm going to have Gupta maintain the old Visual Basic apps.
This is business. We're here to allocate our resources, be they money or people, as best as we can in order to get the greatest return. Professional programmers will set aside their emotions in order to achieve this goal, and will accept being judged as part of the resource allocation process. They realize that this isn't some fantasy where everybody is happy all of the time, and nobody's feelings get hurt.
It is equally an impossible idealization to think that people usually do set aside their emotions, and only make "technical" criticisms objectively.
The phrase "resource allocation" should have tipped us off to how fast and hard this becomes Machiavellian. If one programmer kisses up much better, went to the right school, or is of a preferred race or political party, or successfully claims the work of the other, etc. - the boss will mysteriously find that this one is more competent.
Since the rationale that we decide everything by merit is unassailable and taken for granted, we bias merit judgments to suit our goals. Any objection can be met by accusing the objector of being emotional and wanting to compromise the merit-based system. In reality merit is determined by a political process.
Every single HN poster will, by amazing chance, turn out to be a shining exception to this rule, completely unbiased by personal opinion or politics.
The phrase "resource allocation" should have tipped us off to how fast and hard this becomes Machiavellian. If one programmer kisses up much better, went to the right school, or is of a preferred race or political party, or successfully claims the work of the other, etc. - the boss will mysteriously find that this one is more competent.
Since the rationale that we decide everything by merit is unassailable and taken for granted, we bias merit judgments to suit our goals. Any objection can be met by accusing the objector of being emotional and wanting to compromise the merit-based system. In reality merit is determined by a political process.
Every single HN poster will, by amazing chance, turn out to be a shining exception to this rule, completely unbiased by personal opinion or politics.
I could see a problem with your methodology where someone is "good with excel", gets to clean up all the shit execl problems, never gets to work on anything interesting, never gets to improve, or learn the C++, which he may be better at given 6 months of using it.
There's nothing stopping such a person from learning additional skills on their own. There's nothing stopping that person from them asking to prove that they do have these additional skills. There's nothing stopping that person from them proving that their new skills provide more value than their old skills. And if that doesn't work, and their new skills are truly valuable, then there's a very good chance that somebody else is willing to pay for those skills.
Judging code is fine though, isn't?
The situation is slightly more complex: Programmers write bad code for many different reasons, but good code only gets written by good programmers. So I think it's fine to judge someone on their commit history, as long as one is understanding of the bad code that inevitably happens. The good code doesn't happen by accident.
I wish I could upvote this more. I guess a corollary would be that if there is some good code in a programmer's history, we can ask "what circumstances made this possible?" and learn how to get the best out of people, rather than looking to find the worst in them.
So we've gone from "Don't judge a book by its' cover" to 'Don't judge a book by its' content'?
How about don't judge anyone until having "walked a mile in their shoes"? Or even... "Don't judge".
Ideally, "before you judge...", you at least spend some time getting to know the person to find out a little more about who it is you're judging. And maybe that's really the issue.
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/judge
How about don't judge anyone until having "walked a mile in their shoes"? Or even... "Don't judge".
Ideally, "before you judge...", you at least spend some time getting to know the person to find out a little more about who it is you're judging. And maybe that's really the issue.
http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/judge
Couldn't agree more
Guessing applicant quality based on evaluating the information you have about him is not judging. I can say "this guy is not a good match for our team, philosophy, and/or strategy" without saying "he is worthless"!
Guessing applicant quality is making a judgment of their capability, which is the core point of the article. I never suggested anyone was judging solely on a persons worth. I am suggesting that getting to know the person provides better insight in all regards.
Edit: And quite frankly hiring a programmer solely on programming capability can often lead to disastrous consequences. So if you can see some higher quality examples, it's worth investigating - IMHO.
Edit: And quite frankly hiring a programmer solely on programming capability can often lead to disastrous consequences. So if you can see some higher quality examples, it's worth investigating - IMHO.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Agree with the blog. Context is (almost) everything.
I feel like my code would be considered bad, but I have no idea what good or bad code looks like. Does anyone have some examples and comparisons between good and bad code?