2 ms·

> Good engineering is really all about empathy and psychology. I disagree. I'll give you a team of psychologists and I'll take a team of mathematicians and we

> Good engineering is really all about empathy and psychology. I disagree. I'll give you a team of psychologists and I'll take a team of mathematicians and we can see who can build the better software. Empathy and psychology are game changers only when they are built upon a broad and deep base of analytical thinking and problem solving.

jondubois 9y ago
Assuming that both groups spent the same amount of time learning programming. For most kinds of large software projects, I think that the psychologists will produce better, more readable and maintainable code. If the project is like a game or something heavy on physics then mathematicians will have the upper hand. I actually did a project for a professor of psychology at a university in the US. They didn't know much programming but I was impressed by the specifications document which they sent me because it didn't have any gaps or inconsistencies like most engineering specifications that I've seen before. The requirements were very clearly expressed. Being able to share very complex ideas with a high degree of accuracy is is an extremely valuable skill.
- sheepmullet 9y ago
  > For most kinds of large software projects, I think that the psychologists will produce better, more readable and maintainable code. Interesting. I've taught third year maths and psychology students and the maths students almost universally produce more sophisticated applications. Of course it's hard to directly compare because the courses had different focuses. > because it didn't have any gaps or inconsistencies Mathematicians are very good at this - where they might fall down is eliciting complex requirements from others. > like most engineering specifications This is more of a deliberate choice on software projects than a lack of ability. I remember the pre-agile days and specs were a lot better.

jondubois 9y ago

Assuming that both groups spent the same amount of time learning programming. For most kinds of large software projects, I think that the psychologists will produce better, more readable and maintainable code. If the project is like a game or something heavy on physics then mathematicians will have the upper hand. I actually did a project for a professor of psychology at a university in the US. They didn't know much programming but I was impressed by the specifications document which they sent me because it didn't have any gaps or inconsistencies like most engineering specifications that I've seen before. The requirements were very clearly expressed. Being able to share very complex ideas with a high degree of accuracy is is an extremely valuable skill.

sheepmullet 9y ago
> For most kinds of large software projects, I think that the psychologists will produce better, more readable and maintainable code. Interesting. I've taught third year maths and psychology students and the maths students almost universally produce more sophisticated applications. Of course it's hard to directly compare because the courses had different focuses. > because it didn't have any gaps or inconsistencies Mathematicians are very good at this - where they might fall down is eliciting complex requirements from others. > like most engineering specifications This is more of a deliberate choice on software projects than a lack of ability. I remember the pre-agile days and specs were a lot better.