3 ms·
My bias is exactly the opposite; I assume that anyone calling themselves a "software developer" or a "software engineer" is probably more interested in implemen
by mquander 16y ago
My bias is exactly the opposite; I assume that anyone calling themselves a "software developer" or a "software engineer" is probably more interested in implementing a design pattern than writing good code, and probably knows about as much about computer science as he read on Coding Horror.
I think both of our biases are dumb.
- jayliew 16y agoThere's something to be said about purposely inflating one's title to sound cooler (there's certainly bad people graduating with CS degrees), but let's set that point aside for a moment. Sounds to me like you saying that implementing a design pattern != good code? An example of my bias is more towards something like this: (1) someone with a CS background is more likely to notice and inefficient algorithm and know how to optimize it (2) someone who just knows how to code in a language may not be aware of the presence of a suboptimal algorithm, much less know how to optimize it How do you explain to a non-technical person the difference and importance between (1) and (2)? I guess it's going to be difficult, but I was curious if anyone was able to easily convey (1) or (2) in a quick short introductory pitch.
- mquander 16y agoWell, the stereotype I was shooting for was someone who overarchitects things and who is really shackled to some particular set of concepts, methodologies, and tools; the sort of person who will go on implementing "factories" and "strategies" in languages and situations where they don't apply. Personally, if I were tasked to explain that distinction, I would shorten (1) to "a good programmer" and shorten (2) to "a bad programmer."