4 ms·

The top comment on a post about how to become a better programmer effectively amounts to "Don't try to be a better programmer, instead do X, Y, and Z because th

The top comment on a post about how to become a better programmer effectively amounts to "Don't try to be a better programmer, instead do X, Y, and Z because that will make more money"? I remember you saying somewhere that you're into optimizing businesses and money is a great way to keep score, and in light of that, this comment even makes sense, but please keep in mind that for some people becoming a better programmer is not about maximizing ROI.

patio11 15y ago
I'm totally OK with that. FWIW, my comment is about being a better engineer: I simply don't think that programming skill uniquely makes one a better engineer when divorced from user needs or commercial considerations.
chc 15y ago
There are different ideas of what makes a "better programmer." To paint with a very broad brush, there's a divide between "A good programmer is somebody who makes good programs" and "A good programmer is somebody who knows how to do a lot of different programming tasks well and knows all the right techniques." If having more experience with different kinds of code is your idea of being a better programmer, then the OP is sufficient and more power to you. Other people feel that a programmer's purpose is to create useful things, and the programmer who creates more useful things is better. In this light, Patrick's comment is relevant, because a little bit more domain knowledge will usually improve your program more than prior experience implementing a B-tree database.
seiji 15y ago
In some ways, I see patio11 as the Sarah Palin of HN (in PR tactics, not brains). Formula: show up, comment on everything to improve your personal brand, bend every conversation to your personal narrative, speak very authoritatively with flowery down-to-earth gosh darn folksy language, and stay sufficiently out of the way so you can't be harshly judged (half term gov = "microisv"). My opinion about this is proof in itself it works. I just get annoyed realizing other people have programmed my brain without my express consent.
rgraham 15y ago
I took two things away from what patio11 said. One is to do things start to finish. Tests, deployment, faqs, code, marketing, polish, etc. You learn to appreciate the people and teams around you. You also gain useful skills. The other is to emphasize learning the most for areas that have the largest payoff. For most programmers this means stuff that isn't programming. This dovetails nicely with an idea that CrossFit points out: Pullups make downhill skiers better. That exercise has no direct functional application to downhill skiing, but improving your big weaknesses in fitness often pays off more than perfecting your strengths.
- nostrademons 15y ago
  I think your last point is heavily situation-dependent. What you really want to do is maximize the area of your Voronoi-diagram: the problem space for which you or resources you control are the best available solution. Sometimes the best way to do this is to eliminate a weakness, so that it's no longer a dealbreaker for people that wish to use you as a solution. But many times, the best way is to perfect your strengths, so that you're clearly better than the alternatives around you. People are willing to forgive and work around many weaknesses if you're very, very good at your strengths.
anamax 15y ago
> The top comment on a post about how to become a better programmer effectively amounts to "Don't try to be a better programmer, instead do X, Y, and Z because that will make more money"? You missed the part where he discussed learning what to program. While folks who leave that decision to PHBs may have good skills, I think that knowing what to program is an important part of being a good-to-great programmer.
anamax 15y ago
> The top comment on a post about how to become a better programmer effectively amounts to "Don't try to be a better programmer, instead do X, Y, and Z because that will make more money"? You missed the part where he discussed learning what to program. While folks who leave that decision to PHBs may have good skills, I think that knowing what to program is an important part of being a good-to-great programmer.
Goladus 15y ago
> The top comment on a post about how to become a better programmer effectively amounts to "Don't try to be a better programmer, instead do X, Y, and Z because that will make more money"? I read it more as: don't be a better programmer, write better programs.
floppydisk 15y ago
I think Patio is right to a certain degree. You can be the rock star of rock star programmers, but if you can't explain to me what you're doing, what it does in general (or for me) and why I or anyone else should use it, you're toast. This will depend on job to job and where you want to go, career wise, but I've found, in my current gig, having soft skills does pay off. At its genesis, coding is problem solving. We are trying to solve someone's problem(s) using a computer. All the coding skills in the world won't help us come up with solutions to people's problems if we lack the ability to listen to the end user, translate their needs into code, and then explain to them why they need this and how it solves their problem. Also, I've found that developing your non coding skills also gives you different perspectives into problem solving.

patio11 15y ago

I'm totally OK with that. FWIW, my comment is about being a better engineer: I simply don't think that programming skill uniquely makes one a better engineer when divorced from user needs or commercial considerations.

chc 15y ago

There are different ideas of what makes a "better programmer." To paint with a very broad brush, there's a divide between "A good programmer is somebody who makes good programs" and "A good programmer is somebody who knows how to do a lot of different programming tasks well and knows all the right techniques." If having more experience with different kinds of code is your idea of being a better programmer, then the OP is sufficient and more power to you. Other people feel that a programmer's purpose is to create useful things, and the programmer who creates more useful things is better. In this light, Patrick's comment is relevant, because a little bit more domain knowledge will usually improve your program more than prior experience implementing a B-tree database.

seiji 15y ago

In some ways, I see patio11 as the Sarah Palin of HN (in PR tactics, not brains). Formula: show up, comment on everything to improve your personal brand, bend every conversation to your personal narrative, speak very authoritatively with flowery down-to-earth gosh darn folksy language, and stay sufficiently out of the way so you can't be harshly judged (half term gov = "microisv"). My opinion about this is proof in itself it works. I just get annoyed realizing other people have programmed my brain without my express consent.

rgraham 15y ago

I took two things away from what patio11 said. One is to do things start to finish. Tests, deployment, faqs, code, marketing, polish, etc. You learn to appreciate the people and teams around you. You also gain useful skills. The other is to emphasize learning the most for areas that have the largest payoff. For most programmers this means stuff that isn't programming. This dovetails nicely with an idea that CrossFit points out: Pullups make downhill skiers better. That exercise has no direct functional application to downhill skiing, but improving your big weaknesses in fitness often pays off more than perfecting your strengths.

nostrademons 15y ago
I think your last point is heavily situation-dependent. What you really want to do is maximize the area of your Voronoi-diagram: the problem space for which you or resources you control are the best available solution. Sometimes the best way to do this is to eliminate a weakness, so that it's no longer a dealbreaker for people that wish to use you as a solution. But many times, the best way is to perfect your strengths, so that you're clearly better than the alternatives around you. People are willing to forgive and work around many weaknesses if you're very, very good at your strengths.

anamax 15y ago

> The top comment on a post about how to become a better programmer effectively amounts to "Don't try to be a better programmer, instead do X, Y, and Z because that will make more money"? You missed the part where he discussed learning what to program. While folks who leave that decision to PHBs may have good skills, I think that knowing what to program is an important part of being a good-to-great programmer.

anamax 15y ago

Goladus 15y ago

floppydisk 15y ago

I think Patio is right to a certain degree. You can be the rock star of rock star programmers, but if you can't explain to me what you're doing, what it does in general (or for me) and why I or anyone else should use it, you're toast. This will depend on job to job and where you want to go, career wise, but I've found, in my current gig, having soft skills does pay off. At its genesis, coding is problem solving. We are trying to solve someone's problem(s) using a computer. All the coding skills in the world won't help us come up with solutions to people's problems if we lack the ability to listen to the end user, translate their needs into code, and then explain to them why they need this and how it solves their problem. Also, I've found that developing your non coding skills also gives you different perspectives into problem solving.