4 ms·

To me, your line of thinking seems to suggest that there is some end-game where a canonical program could be written and all programs would converge towards thi

To me, your line of thinking seems to suggest that there is some end-game where a canonical program could be written and all programs would converge towards this with standardization. But that won't happen just by standardizing structure. The structure still holds content which has to adapt to those business goals etc. I think it is more helpful to think of programming like other writing tasks. The difference in size and structure of programs is more like the difference between tweets, blog posts, shopping lists, poems, political essays, short stories, daily news articles, novels, anthologies, text books, academic articles, encyclopedias, court records, state constitutions, legislation, car repair manuals, and tomes by Russian authors. Having standards and idioms for structure in writing doesn't remove the need for writing, creative input, nor even for creative exceptions to those standards and idioms.

ksk 9y ago
But I don't agree that programing SHOULD be a creative task. The primary reason being that A creative tasks' output depends quite a bit on the person performing the task. Whereas for an engineering task, less so - as long as the engineer is trained, knowledgeable etc, etc (usual caveats for pedants..) >But that won't happen just by standardizing structure. The structure still holds content which has to adapt to those business goals etc. I agree, but i'm thinking along the lines of - more LEGO, less literature. I.e. A move towards a more standardized problem specification process that itself becomes the solution, or at the very least through minimal effort.
- khedoros1 9y ago
  > I agree, but i'm thinking along the lines of - more LEGO, less literature. That's what I see happening. There's already a huge reliance on just connecting together libraries within the confines of a framework for lots of problems.

ksk 9y ago

But I don't agree that programing SHOULD be a creative task. The primary reason being that A creative tasks' output depends quite a bit on the person performing the task. Whereas for an engineering task, less so - as long as the engineer is trained, knowledgeable etc, etc (usual caveats for pedants..) >But that won't happen just by standardizing structure. The structure still holds content which has to adapt to those business goals etc. I agree, but i'm thinking along the lines of - more LEGO, less literature. I.e. A move towards a more standardized problem specification process that itself becomes the solution, or at the very least through minimal effort.

khedoros1 9y ago
> I agree, but i'm thinking along the lines of - more LEGO, less literature. That's what I see happening. There's already a huge reliance on just connecting together libraries within the confines of a framework for lots of problems.