8 ms·

I never understand why Martin gets the kind of attention he does. As far as I can tell, the only significant achievement he's done for the technical community

I never understand why Martin gets the kind of attention he does. As far as I can tell, the only significant achievement he's done for the technical community is the Agile manifesto. Outside of that, he's a typical consultant in that he's got books, training courses, etc. However, I have yet to find a significant publicly known project he's been involved in where he's had to put his principle into practice.

chrisseaton 9y ago
There's definitely two types of very well known speakers. People who have worked on some really notable project. Linus Torvalds, David Heinemeier Hansson, Joel Spolsky and so on. I know these people are worth listening to because I can see that their code is a success. Then there are people who I have no idea what they have ever written at all. Robert Martin, Martin Fowler and so on. I don't know if I should listen to what these people say at all. Does it work? What software projects have they made a success that I can look at? I suppose in the latter case it's usually closed-source enterprise code that they've consulted on? Well if I can't look at it I'm not sure I'm just prepared to take their word that it's successful. Is this reasonable of me?
- rootlocus 9y ago
  > People who have worked on some really notable project. Linus Torvalds, David Heinemeier Hansson, Joel Spolsky and so on. I know these people are worth listening to because I can see that their code is a success. I agree with your examples, Linus Torvalds in particular. However, I would not consider Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs or Bill Gates worth listening to on a technical level just because their products are a success.
  - jerf 9y ago
    Bill Gates was actually a pretty decent programmer. His technical insights peter out somewhere in the 1980s or early 90s at most, but he's had some interesting things to say about those eras. (Interesting in the sense that it's someone speaking about the eras that was there in a big way, not necessarily because he's got surprising insights into software engineering or something.)
    - etblg 9y ago
      Do you have any links to his insights? They sound pretty interesting but I'm not sure what to search for to find them.
      - Delmania 9y ago
        https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/06/16/my-first-billg-review/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/06/16/my-first-billg-rev...
        rootlocus 9y ago
        He didn’t meddle in software if he trusted the people who were working on it, but you couldn’t bullshit him for a minute because he was a programmer. A real, actual, programmer. I stand corrected. Thank you for the read.
  - marcosdumay 9y ago
    They are worth listening when talking about the kind of thing they used to make their products a success.
- scarface74 9y ago
  In fairness, Joel Spolsky has done a lot of great work as a founder - founding Stack Exchange being the most notable — but is any of his personal work open source? We don’t know how well written his code is. Twitter is successful but their code has reputation for being horrible.
  - chrisseaton 9y ago
    It's not open source, but he led Excel development didn't he? I can use that and appreciate that it's good quality software so I want to hear about how he managed that. I don't know if I'm just ignorant, but to be honest I have no idea if people like Martin and Fowler can program at all or not!
    - Cthulhu_ 9y ago
      Fowler in specific definitely knows a lot about the process of software development though, I mean he's written multiple books on the craftsmanship of software development. Practical advice which a lot of people can see the value of. Bob is more of a theoretical, philosophical guy it seems.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - tptacek 9y ago
      No, Spolsky didn't lead Excel development. He was a PM. I happen to like Spolsky a lot but most of the career success we've actually seen from him is managerial, which is not unimportant, but it's not the same as being a dev lead on Excel. On the other hand, Spolsky's programming advice is much more broad-spectrum and rooted in common sense. I'm not sure you've ever seen Spolsky dismiss a whole category of languages or correctness tools, for instance.
      - chrisseaton 9y ago
        Isn't the PM the one who leads project? (I don't work in a team that uses these terms so genuinely asking.)
- jacobush 9y ago
  There is a lot to it, but people still need to find ways to make corporate development work better. Torvalds et al, while great, can't offer a lot to help here. (Except indirectly by producing a good foundation to build upon, like Linux.)
- d_t_w 9y ago
  Very.
- Delmania 9y ago
  I'd say Fowler has more credibility because his books are a bit more technical than Martin's. His book on refactoring is evidence he's worked with a lot of code.
  - steego 9y ago
    I wanted to echo this. Fowler should not be lumped in with the other guys for his Refactoring book alone. Not only is it a really good guide that helps programmers understand how to rigorously make incremental, non-breaking changes. It almost reads like a specification for a refactoring tool. Really good software engineers write more than code. They know how to clearly outline ideas than can be handed to other developers.
- jnbiche 9y ago
  To be fair to Martin Fowler, his writing is generally more journalistic in its approach. Unlike the others you refer to, who are very ideological in their writing, Fowler describes technologies and programming patterns/approaches, in much the same way a tech journalist would do so. And he writes with a level of detail that suggests he's done some significant coding. Also, re: open source, he does sometimes write about particular open source projects that have successfully made use of the tools or technologies he advocates. Or simply about the open source projects themselves. I happen to enjoy a lot of Fowler's blog writing. In particular, I've enjoyed reading his posts on the LMAX architecture. Fascinating stuff.
- eesmith 9y ago
  It is not reasonable of you to ask unless you've made a reasonable effort to look for their software and failed. Robert Martin's best known open source software contributions are for FitNesse, which is reasonably well known in the testing world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FitNesse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FitNesse Tell me, have you read the Space Shuttle control software? There are dozens of not hundreds of papers about NASA's development process. Are you saying that since you can't look at it, you're not prepared to take their word that the software is successful? Because it seems to me that there are other ways to judge success than simply reviewing the code.
  - chrisseaton 9y ago
    Sorry I didn't really mean about reviewing the code - I meant being able to see the successful project. I listen to Torvalds when he talks about how to write his software, because his software is a massive success. I'd listen to NASA because their missions were a success. Why should I listen to other people like Robert Martin? I had seen FitNesse in the past, and while I'm sure it's a useful and well-written bit of software, I don't anyone would remotely describe it a particularly notable success. Why would I listen to his ideas more than anyone else who's written a testing framework that some people use?
    - eesmith 9y ago
      Ahh, I apologize. I misunderstood your original comment. I'm still a confused off by your comment "I have no idea what they have ever written at all. Robert Martin, .. and so on." when you say that you've "seen FitNesse in the past". Did you not know that he is part of the project? Have you looked to see what projects they've been on? FWIW, I don't think Fitnesse is well-written. When I looked at it about 8 years back there were several security holes in it, including no protection against directory traversal attacks. It was clear that the developers had no experience working in an untrusted environment. Which, to be fair, is the security model for a FitNesse deployment. (FitNesse.org is served by FitNesse-v20160618, so that's not 100% true.) I don't trust Martin's views. I think he's full of bluster, and makes assertions far beyond what is justifiable. For example, he did a Prime Numbers kata some years back where it was clear he was gaming the problem - unknowingly, I think - so that his cute but inefficient two-liner would be an acceptable answer, while poo-pooing those who immediately thought to use a sieve variant.
tptacek 9y ago
I have the same question. Not, "what makes Martin interesting or worthwhile", which is a totally subjective question, but, "what are the most compelling projects whose success he enabled?". That seems like a simple question we could actually answer here without having loud debates about unit testing or whatever.

chrisseaton 9y ago

There's definitely two types of very well known speakers. People who have worked on some really notable project. Linus Torvalds, David Heinemeier Hansson, Joel Spolsky and so on. I know these people are worth listening to because I can see that their code is a success. Then there are people who I have no idea what they have ever written at all. Robert Martin, Martin Fowler and so on. I don't know if I should listen to what these people say at all. Does it work? What software projects have they made a success that I can look at? I suppose in the latter case it's usually closed-source enterprise code that they've consulted on? Well if I can't look at it I'm not sure I'm just prepared to take their word that it's successful. Is this reasonable of me?

rootlocus 9y ago
> People who have worked on some really notable project. Linus Torvalds, David Heinemeier Hansson, Joel Spolsky and so on. I know these people are worth listening to because I can see that their code is a success. I agree with your examples, Linus Torvalds in particular. However, I would not consider Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs or Bill Gates worth listening to on a technical level just because their products are a success.
- jerf 9y ago
  Bill Gates was actually a pretty decent programmer. His technical insights peter out somewhere in the 1980s or early 90s at most, but he's had some interesting things to say about those eras. (Interesting in the sense that it's someone speaking about the eras that was there in a big way, not necessarily because he's got surprising insights into software engineering or something.)
  - etblg 9y ago
    Do you have any links to his insights? They sound pretty interesting but I'm not sure what to search for to find them.
    - Delmania 9y ago
      https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/06/16/my-first-billg-review/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/06/16/my-first-billg-rev...
      - rootlocus 9y ago
        He didn’t meddle in software if he trusted the people who were working on it, but you couldn’t bullshit him for a minute because he was a programmer. A real, actual, programmer. I stand corrected. Thank you for the read.
- marcosdumay 9y ago
  They are worth listening when talking about the kind of thing they used to make their products a success.
scarface74 9y ago
In fairness, Joel Spolsky has done a lot of great work as a founder - founding Stack Exchange being the most notable — but is any of his personal work open source? We don’t know how well written his code is. Twitter is successful but their code has reputation for being horrible.
- chrisseaton 9y ago
  It's not open source, but he led Excel development didn't he? I can use that and appreciate that it's good quality software so I want to hear about how he managed that. I don't know if I'm just ignorant, but to be honest I have no idea if people like Martin and Fowler can program at all or not!
  - Cthulhu_ 9y ago
    Fowler in specific definitely knows a lot about the process of software development though, I mean he's written multiple books on the craftsmanship of software development. Practical advice which a lot of people can see the value of. Bob is more of a theoretical, philosophical guy it seems.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - tptacek 9y ago
    No, Spolsky didn't lead Excel development. He was a PM. I happen to like Spolsky a lot but most of the career success we've actually seen from him is managerial, which is not unimportant, but it's not the same as being a dev lead on Excel. On the other hand, Spolsky's programming advice is much more broad-spectrum and rooted in common sense. I'm not sure you've ever seen Spolsky dismiss a whole category of languages or correctness tools, for instance.
    - chrisseaton 9y ago
      Isn't the PM the one who leads project? (I don't work in a team that uses these terms so genuinely asking.)
jacobush 9y ago
There is a lot to it, but people still need to find ways to make corporate development work better. Torvalds et al, while great, can't offer a lot to help here. (Except indirectly by producing a good foundation to build upon, like Linux.)
d_t_w 9y ago
Very.
Delmania 9y ago
I'd say Fowler has more credibility because his books are a bit more technical than Martin's. His book on refactoring is evidence he's worked with a lot of code.
- steego 9y ago
  I wanted to echo this. Fowler should not be lumped in with the other guys for his Refactoring book alone. Not only is it a really good guide that helps programmers understand how to rigorously make incremental, non-breaking changes. It almost reads like a specification for a refactoring tool. Really good software engineers write more than code. They know how to clearly outline ideas than can be handed to other developers.
jnbiche 9y ago
To be fair to Martin Fowler, his writing is generally more journalistic in its approach. Unlike the others you refer to, who are very ideological in their writing, Fowler describes technologies and programming patterns/approaches, in much the same way a tech journalist would do so. And he writes with a level of detail that suggests he's done some significant coding. Also, re: open source, he does sometimes write about particular open source projects that have successfully made use of the tools or technologies he advocates. Or simply about the open source projects themselves. I happen to enjoy a lot of Fowler's blog writing. In particular, I've enjoyed reading his posts on the LMAX architecture. Fascinating stuff.
eesmith 9y ago
It is not reasonable of you to ask unless you've made a reasonable effort to look for their software and failed. Robert Martin's best known open source software contributions are for FitNesse, which is reasonably well known in the testing world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FitNesse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FitNesse Tell me, have you read the Space Shuttle control software? There are dozens of not hundreds of papers about NASA's development process. Are you saying that since you can't look at it, you're not prepared to take their word that the software is successful? Because it seems to me that there are other ways to judge success than simply reviewing the code.
- chrisseaton 9y ago
  Sorry I didn't really mean about reviewing the code - I meant being able to see the successful project. I listen to Torvalds when he talks about how to write his software, because his software is a massive success. I'd listen to NASA because their missions were a success. Why should I listen to other people like Robert Martin? I had seen FitNesse in the past, and while I'm sure it's a useful and well-written bit of software, I don't anyone would remotely describe it a particularly notable success. Why would I listen to his ideas more than anyone else who's written a testing framework that some people use?
  - eesmith 9y ago
    Ahh, I apologize. I misunderstood your original comment. I'm still a confused off by your comment "I have no idea what they have ever written at all. Robert Martin, .. and so on." when you say that you've "seen FitNesse in the past". Did you not know that he is part of the project? Have you looked to see what projects they've been on? FWIW, I don't think Fitnesse is well-written. When I looked at it about 8 years back there were several security holes in it, including no protection against directory traversal attacks. It was clear that the developers had no experience working in an untrusted environment. Which, to be fair, is the security model for a FitNesse deployment. (FitNesse.org is served by FitNesse-v20160618, so that's not 100% true.) I don't trust Martin's views. I think he's full of bluster, and makes assertions far beyond what is justifiable. For example, he did a Prime Numbers kata some years back where it was clear he was gaming the problem - unknowingly, I think - so that his cute but inefficient two-liner would be an acceptable answer, while poo-pooing those who immediately thought to use a sieve variant.

tptacek 9y ago

I have the same question. Not, "what makes Martin interesting or worthwhile", which is a totally subjective question, but, "what are the most compelling projects whose success he enabled?". That seems like a simple question we could actually answer here without having loud debates about unit testing or whatever.