6 ms·

Side projects are for software what a portfolio is for other creative industries. You don't hire a designer sight unseen -- usually you ask for a sample. It mak

Side projects are for software what a portfolio is for other creative industries. You don't hire a designer sight unseen -- usually you ask for a sample. It makes perfect sense to expect the same of technology.

sidlls 9y ago
Only if you believe software development is neither engineering nor science, and is purely creative. It isn't, though, and demanding a portfolio is almost as terrible a practice as Cracking the Coding Interview style interviews.
- TAForObvReasons 9y ago
  In traditional engineering disciplines like civil engineering, organizing bodies and licensure communicate competency, applicability, and ethical awareness. Software development has no industry-wide equivalent. There are small certifications for Cisco et al but for the general practice there's no standard.
  - sidlls 9y ago
    This is true, and I regard that as a reflection of the immaturity of this industry.
    - Jach 9y ago
      I hear this a lot but I think it's deeper than that, such that letting the industry age isn't going to lead to the same end. The issue is the very one that is in this thread: programming is at a weird intersection between art, science, math, and engineering. Credentials and licensing matter a lot less than simple output. You can gain a ton of experience in the field even if you're stranded on an island with no internet and just a solar powered laptop capable of executing new code. Even without a computer you can still work like a mathematician and propose problems, even creative problems with no engineering applications, and then solve by coming up with and writing down algorithms for a computer you don't have. You can imagine arbitrary business details that get in the way of a clean program and force you to start thinking in architecture and system design. Demanding a portfolio isn't a great hiring strategy simply because a lot of people's best work isn't out in the open. Who would demand a portfolio from someone like Mike Acton? It'd be enough to know what he's worked on and talk to him. And at the same time requiring a licensing proxy is no help either, he never went to college AFAIK and that'd probably be a minimum requirement for most actual licensing proposals.
  - vonmoltke 9y ago
    This frequently comes up in discussions like this. Licensure is a joke with respect to demonstrating competency. Yes, the initial hurdle is high. However, once you are licensed it's hard to lose it. I would never rely on licensure as a measure of competency or currency. On top of that, many electrical and mechanical engineers are not licensed because they don't need to be. (Everybody likes to jump to the civils in these discussions and forget about us, since civils are basically required to be licensed.). EEs and MEs don't get put through the same bullshit that this industry puts developers through.
- kodablah 9y ago
  > Only if you believe software development is neither engineering nor science, and is purely creative. I have to believe it "is neither engineering nor science, and is purely creative"? Only those extremes? I believe it is some of all 3 and I don't think requesting (i.e. not "demanding") a portfolio or prior work is any more unreasonable than not asking for it.
  - sidlls 9y ago
    Fine, then you must believe it's mostly creative. Far more than you think it's engineering or science. Otherwise a portfolio would simply be at best an interesting conversation piece and not at all indicative of ability.
    - detaro 9y ago
      Why do you think a portfolio can't tell you about someones engineering abilities? Can engineering not be judged by looking at source (and potentially surrounding documents)? What would be missing for you to do that?
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- web007 9y ago
  Software development is all of those things. You need the engineering experience to know what to do. You need the science to know ways to / not to do things. And you need the creativity to put them together. Is your "portfolio piece" spaghetti code or well-thought-out modules? Is it doing something recursively that shouldn't be? Do you have elegant code or brute-force solutions? Is it write-only? All of these can be seen in a portfolio or side project if you choose to look.
- bad_user 9y ago
  Architecture isn't purely creative either, having overlap with engineering. You ask architects for a portfolio too.
  - sidlls 9y ago
    That's more like asking them for a resume. A portfolio of side projects isn't remotely the same thing.
- vacri 9y ago
  Software development is a craft, not fully art and not fully engineering. It definitely is not science.
- dozzie 9y ago
  > Only if you believe software development is neither engineering nor science, and is purely creative. It's certainly not a science, and it's very rarely engineering. About the creativity, it's a craft. There is some creativity baked in, but about the same amount as for mechanics or carpentry.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
    Maybe software development should be considered a trade?
    - dozzie 9y ago
      Certainly. And it should be taught like trades were for centuries: with apprenticeships.
hughes 9y ago
What if we consider software candidates like tradespeople? How do electricians and welders demonstrate their ability in an interview?
- TAForObvReasons 9y ago
  For electricians and welders, there are licenses / certification. Obtaining the license / certification demonstrates the baseline competency
  - ketzu 9y ago
    Isn't this like a college degree?
- ztoben 9y ago
  Work history, references, general questions and maybe some whiteboarding. Honestly just a regular interview.
- weberc2 9y ago
  Software development is certainly more creative than electrical or welding work, and thus certifications are more meaningful. In software engineering, what certifications you have or what languages you're familiar with is a comparably poor predictor of your success on a given project.
ng12 9y ago
I can take a 10 minute look at a designer's portfolio and get reasonably accurate insight into their style and abilities. Do you think a 10 minute scan of an arbitrary GitHub account is the same? I say decidedly not.
- notzorbo3 9y ago
  Why not? Can you elaborate? Because 10 minutes with a Github account is enough for me to decide whether I'd hire someone or not.
  - ng12 9y ago
    I mean, what am I supposed to look at? Unless it's obviously poorly written (e.g. no consistent style) how do you judge it? Perhaps more tellingly I've interviewed people with seemingly impressive GitHub accounts who were just terrible. That experience leads me to believe it's easy to set up a GitHub that "looks good" without having the chops to back it up.
  - sotojuan 9y ago
    Why? A lot of people (if not most) treat their non-work GitHub as a place to host random experiments and projects. Unless one plans to publish projects for others to use, no one should be forced to have perfect code for a one off idea if they don't want to. There are a lot of great engineers with empty or "bad" Github profiles.
    - notzorbo3 9y ago
      When I look at a developer's Github profile I know that: 1. They care enough to have a Github profile 2. I can see their actual interests. 3. I know they're interested in random experiments 4. I can see if and how they treat their projects. Are they dedicated maintainers, or do they just fire off one-shot projects without ever deciding to maintain them? And a whole lot more. A person who maintains a single shell script project with diligence is worth more to me than a thousand developers with bullshit lisp and haskell repositories. Yes, there's a bunch of great engineers with empty or bad github profiles out there. But those engineers aren't showing me that they're great engineers. The ones with a single or few well-maintained projects do.
walshemj 9y ago
But creatives are allowed to put work done for others on their show real this is not true for professional jobs
pjc50 9y ago
Normally people's portfolio would include their actual commercial work; it's just the way copyright has turned out in software means we can't do that. Perhaps the best solution would be a unionized right to proper credit to developers like in the film industry.
pault 9y ago
I agree, but the problem with this is that visual design is publicly available, and most professional code is locked behind IP and copyright laws. I can't bring my employer's code base to an interview with another company without risking a heap of legal trouble.

sidlls 9y ago

Only if you believe software development is neither engineering nor science, and is purely creative. It isn't, though, and demanding a portfolio is almost as terrible a practice as Cracking the Coding Interview style interviews.

TAForObvReasons 9y ago
In traditional engineering disciplines like civil engineering, organizing bodies and licensure communicate competency, applicability, and ethical awareness. Software development has no industry-wide equivalent. There are small certifications for Cisco et al but for the general practice there's no standard.
- sidlls 9y ago
  This is true, and I regard that as a reflection of the immaturity of this industry.
  - Jach 9y ago
    I hear this a lot but I think it's deeper than that, such that letting the industry age isn't going to lead to the same end. The issue is the very one that is in this thread: programming is at a weird intersection between art, science, math, and engineering. Credentials and licensing matter a lot less than simple output. You can gain a ton of experience in the field even if you're stranded on an island with no internet and just a solar powered laptop capable of executing new code. Even without a computer you can still work like a mathematician and propose problems, even creative problems with no engineering applications, and then solve by coming up with and writing down algorithms for a computer you don't have. You can imagine arbitrary business details that get in the way of a clean program and force you to start thinking in architecture and system design. Demanding a portfolio isn't a great hiring strategy simply because a lot of people's best work isn't out in the open. Who would demand a portfolio from someone like Mike Acton? It'd be enough to know what he's worked on and talk to him. And at the same time requiring a licensing proxy is no help either, he never went to college AFAIK and that'd probably be a minimum requirement for most actual licensing proposals.
- vonmoltke 9y ago
  This frequently comes up in discussions like this. Licensure is a joke with respect to demonstrating competency. Yes, the initial hurdle is high. However, once you are licensed it's hard to lose it. I would never rely on licensure as a measure of competency or currency. On top of that, many electrical and mechanical engineers are not licensed because they don't need to be. (Everybody likes to jump to the civils in these discussions and forget about us, since civils are basically required to be licensed.). EEs and MEs don't get put through the same bullshit that this industry puts developers through.
kodablah 9y ago
> Only if you believe software development is neither engineering nor science, and is purely creative. I have to believe it "is neither engineering nor science, and is purely creative"? Only those extremes? I believe it is some of all 3 and I don't think requesting (i.e. not "demanding") a portfolio or prior work is any more unreasonable than not asking for it.
- sidlls 9y ago
  Fine, then you must believe it's mostly creative. Far more than you think it's engineering or science. Otherwise a portfolio would simply be at best an interesting conversation piece and not at all indicative of ability.
  - detaro 9y ago
    Why do you think a portfolio can't tell you about someones engineering abilities? Can engineering not be judged by looking at source (and potentially surrounding documents)? What would be missing for you to do that?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
web007 9y ago
Software development is all of those things. You need the engineering experience to know what to do. You need the science to know ways to / not to do things. And you need the creativity to put them together. Is your "portfolio piece" spaghetti code or well-thought-out modules? Is it doing something recursively that shouldn't be? Do you have elegant code or brute-force solutions? Is it write-only? All of these can be seen in a portfolio or side project if you choose to look.
bad_user 9y ago
Architecture isn't purely creative either, having overlap with engineering. You ask architects for a portfolio too.
- sidlls 9y ago
  That's more like asking them for a resume. A portfolio of side projects isn't remotely the same thing.
vacri 9y ago
Software development is a craft, not fully art and not fully engineering. It definitely is not science.
dozzie 9y ago
> Only if you believe software development is neither engineering nor science, and is purely creative. It's certainly not a science, and it's very rarely engineering. About the creativity, it's a craft. There is some creativity baked in, but about the same amount as for mechanics or carpentry.
- TheSpiceIsLife 9y ago
  Maybe software development should be considered a trade?
  - dozzie 9y ago
    Certainly. And it should be taught like trades were for centuries: with apprenticeships.

hughes 9y ago

What if we consider software candidates like tradespeople? How do electricians and welders demonstrate their ability in an interview?

TAForObvReasons 9y ago
For electricians and welders, there are licenses / certification. Obtaining the license / certification demonstrates the baseline competency
- ketzu 9y ago
  Isn't this like a college degree?
ztoben 9y ago
Work history, references, general questions and maybe some whiteboarding. Honestly just a regular interview.
weberc2 9y ago
Software development is certainly more creative than electrical or welding work, and thus certifications are more meaningful. In software engineering, what certifications you have or what languages you're familiar with is a comparably poor predictor of your success on a given project.

ng12 9y ago

I can take a 10 minute look at a designer's portfolio and get reasonably accurate insight into their style and abilities. Do you think a 10 minute scan of an arbitrary GitHub account is the same? I say decidedly not.

notzorbo3 9y ago
Why not? Can you elaborate? Because 10 minutes with a Github account is enough for me to decide whether I'd hire someone or not.
- ng12 9y ago
  I mean, what am I supposed to look at? Unless it's obviously poorly written (e.g. no consistent style) how do you judge it? Perhaps more tellingly I've interviewed people with seemingly impressive GitHub accounts who were just terrible. That experience leads me to believe it's easy to set up a GitHub that "looks good" without having the chops to back it up.
- sotojuan 9y ago
  Why? A lot of people (if not most) treat their non-work GitHub as a place to host random experiments and projects. Unless one plans to publish projects for others to use, no one should be forced to have perfect code for a one off idea if they don't want to. There are a lot of great engineers with empty or "bad" Github profiles.
  - notzorbo3 9y ago
    When I look at a developer's Github profile I know that: 1. They care enough to have a Github profile 2. I can see their actual interests. 3. I know they're interested in random experiments 4. I can see if and how they treat their projects. Are they dedicated maintainers, or do they just fire off one-shot projects without ever deciding to maintain them? And a whole lot more. A person who maintains a single shell script project with diligence is worth more to me than a thousand developers with bullshit lisp and haskell repositories. Yes, there's a bunch of great engineers with empty or bad github profiles out there. But those engineers aren't showing me that they're great engineers. The ones with a single or few well-maintained projects do.

walshemj 9y ago

But creatives are allowed to put work done for others on their show real this is not true for professional jobs

pjc50 9y ago

Normally people's portfolio would include their actual commercial work; it's just the way copyright has turned out in software means we can't do that. Perhaps the best solution would be a unionized right to proper credit to developers like in the film industry.

pault 9y ago

I agree, but the problem with this is that visual design is publicly available, and most professional code is locked behind IP and copyright laws. I can't bring my employer's code base to an interview with another company without risking a heap of legal trouble.