3 ms·

I had a similar sentiment - As a programmer, I did not want to be communicating with a client, I wanted to be left alone in a sense that I only ever had to inte

I had a similar sentiment - As a programmer, I did not want to be communicating with a client, I wanted to be left alone in a sense that I only ever had to interact with people that understand how coding works. I think it's doable; say you are the sole developer of a massively used library. The programmers being your only users - they read the API docs, submit an occasional feature request/bug report.

TeMPOraL 7y ago
Heh. I have a reverse sentiment. As a programmer, I want to communicate with the actual users who'll be using my product. But without two layers of intermediaries on both our and customer side, who end up turning this whole thing into a game of telephone, ostensibly in the name of all the other important stakeholders.
giobox 7y ago
The programmer users are arguably "clients" in this context too. Much the same sorts of issues, different labels. One need only look at the bug tracker on the average "massively used library" to see that you will be communicating with clients a great deal. Your dream of a small group of perfect programmers filing neat and accurate feature requests or bug reports doesn't match any reality I've ever seen. To expect them all to "understand how coding works" is also likely a pipe-dream - users of all ability levels are out there writing code, filing bug reports for things that aren't bugs, asking questions in forums that aren't meant for those questions, mad at you because the direction the project has taken isn't the one they or the company they work for want/need, etc etc...
Sharlin 7y ago
Users of a library are still users. You can write a library in an ivory tower, just like you can write applications in an ivory tower, but that kind of software is written for yourself and only incidentally for anyone else. People might still use it if there are no viable alternatives, but don’t expect them to be very happy about it. Especially because scarcity of communication also implies scarcity of documentation.

TeMPOraL 7y ago

Heh. I have a reverse sentiment. As a programmer, I want to communicate with the actual users who'll be using my product. But without two layers of intermediaries on both our and customer side, who end up turning this whole thing into a game of telephone, ostensibly in the name of all the other important stakeholders.

giobox 7y ago

The programmer users are arguably "clients" in this context too. Much the same sorts of issues, different labels. One need only look at the bug tracker on the average "massively used library" to see that you will be communicating with clients a great deal. Your dream of a small group of perfect programmers filing neat and accurate feature requests or bug reports doesn't match any reality I've ever seen. To expect them all to "understand how coding works" is also likely a pipe-dream - users of all ability levels are out there writing code, filing bug reports for things that aren't bugs, asking questions in forums that aren't meant for those questions, mad at you because the direction the project has taken isn't the one they or the company they work for want/need, etc etc...

Sharlin 7y ago

Users of a library are still users. You can write a library in an ivory tower, just like you can write applications in an ivory tower, but that kind of software is written for yourself and only incidentally for anyone else. People might still use it if there are no viable alternatives, but don’t expect them to be very happy about it. Especially because scarcity of communication also implies scarcity of documentation.