3 ms·

> I also consider software as a form of art (which we can debate if you feel) I've never thought of it this way, but I think I agree. Nonetheless, can you plea

• bayindirh 5y ago
  Software can be considered as art from many perspectives IMHO. Some of these perspectives are UI, UX and internal architecture. Smaller parts like API design or implementation of a specific feature can be art in itself though. In my book, elegance and high quality design is important, however it's expensive. A good architecture needs a lot of work to build and even more work to keep it clean, because software tends to outgrow its design during iterations as it gets more features. This is the prime cause of software rot. An elegant architecture is easy to program and extend until you outgrow it. An elegant UI is a beauty to look at. An elegant UX has minimal mental load. OTOH, making all three happen at the same time is a very hard task. My experience is on systems side and high performance code. So I focus on architecture and UX. I try to make very performant and complicated applications very easy to use, almost making them too easy to use. This removes burden from user, it removes friction. The user accomplishes something complicated without much effort, yet the results are precise, accurate and most importantly correct. This is what I consider art. OTOH, I make sure that all custom controls are available to the user if the user needs. In all cases, developer and user gets joy from developing/using the application. It feels nice rather than a burden. It feels smooth, like an enjoyable road trip where you both enjoy the road and driving at the same time.