5 ms·

This article is a direct lift from https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-ten-commandments-of-egoless-programming/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-ten-commandments

This article is a direct lift from https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-ten-commandments-of-egoless-programming/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-ten-commandments-of-egoles... the bulk of it is a verbatim copy of Atwood's summary without credit. These rules do not appear in this form or as a list of "10 commandments" in "Psychology of Computer Programming."

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
pvg 5y ago
I assume you've read the book, what form, if any, do they appear in? I just skimmed through the text very superficially and didn't find anything that looked like these 'commandments'. Is the original Atwood post as iffy as this makes it seem or did I just miss relevant parts?
- skmurphy 5y ago
  I have read the book several times, Atwood offers more of a artistic interpretation of Weinberg's insights. It's no accident that no quote marks appear in his version.
  - pvg 5y ago
    Thanks, I suppose I'll read it myself to get a better idea of the degree of interpretation involved. There's a comment on the Atwood article which makes a point similar to yours above and Atwood's reply is very odd: https://discourse.codinghorror.com/t/the-ten-commandments-of-egoless-programming/825/27 https://discourse.codinghorror.com/t/the-ten-commandments-of... He seems to think these are, in part at least, quotes. And it's not just the "guy in the room" bit - when the commenter points out the book contains no 'commandments', Atwood doesn't say 'Oh, I just summarized it in list form'. He says he doesn't know where the text came from (?!). It's like the Atwood piece is itself derivative of something and it's not just the book and Atwood's own writing? Weird.
    - yesenadam 5y ago
      That's weird isn't it! In a quick search, I couldn't find any occurrence online of the phrase "Don't rewrite code without consultation", one of those commandments, earlier than Atwood's article. This[0] was the earliest other one I could find, from a few months after Atwood's, which says "What Weinberg wrote in that book was a set of guidelines for developers working in a team environment to keep their egos separate from their code. In fact, I think these 10 guidelines.." - but in the book, although Weinberg talks frequently about "egoless programming", I can't see any (isolated) principles or guidelines, much less a list of commandments. I can't find an online version of McCarthy's Dynamics of Software Development to check what's in that. [0] https://www.techrepublic.com/article/the-ten-commandments-of-egoless-programming/ https://www.techrepublic.com/article/the-ten-commandments-of...
      - ImprobableTruth 5y ago
        An earlier article from techrepublic written in 2001: https://www.techrepublic.com/article/egoless-programming-the-path-to-better-code/ https://www.techrepublic.com/article/egoless-programming-the... This is the earliest google hit for "Ten Commandments for egoless programming". Curiously, the author, Lamont Adams, does not explicitly state that the commandments are from the book. Maybe "I present The (Almost) Ten Commandments for egoless programming" means that it's a summary by Adams?
        yesenadam 5y ago
        Oh thanks! Yeah, seems Adams may well be the originator. p.s. I just wrote to him now asking about this! Maybe the truth will surface...
        pvg 5y ago
        Another person to ask, I suppose, is Atwood.
        pvg 5y ago
        I think a plausible explanation that fits all the bits and pieces is that Adams wrote this as a kind of riff of his own, inspired by the concept of 'Egoless Programming'. At some later point Atwood ran across some version of the 'commandments' list, thought they were quotes from the book and wrote his blog post. Thinking they were quotes, he probably didn't feel the need to cite where he found them. It's just a somewhat silly mistake, it happens - although it inadvertently spawned a mighty stream of Internet Wrongness. He should have probably updated and corrected the blog post when someone pointed out his mistake to him in 2016. He probably still should.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

pvg 5y ago

I assume you've read the book, what form, if any, do they appear in? I just skimmed through the text very superficially and didn't find anything that looked like these 'commandments'. Is the original Atwood post as iffy as this makes it seem or did I just miss relevant parts?

skmurphy 5y ago
I have read the book several times, Atwood offers more of a artistic interpretation of Weinberg's insights. It's no accident that no quote marks appear in his version.
- pvg 5y ago
  Thanks, I suppose I'll read it myself to get a better idea of the degree of interpretation involved. There's a comment on the Atwood article which makes a point similar to yours above and Atwood's reply is very odd: https://discourse.codinghorror.com/t/the-ten-commandments-of-egoless-programming/825/27 https://discourse.codinghorror.com/t/the-ten-commandments-of... He seems to think these are, in part at least, quotes. And it's not just the "guy in the room" bit - when the commenter points out the book contains no 'commandments', Atwood doesn't say 'Oh, I just summarized it in list form'. He says he doesn't know where the text came from (?!). It's like the Atwood piece is itself derivative of something and it's not just the book and Atwood's own writing? Weird.
  - yesenadam 5y ago
    That's weird isn't it! In a quick search, I couldn't find any occurrence online of the phrase "Don't rewrite code without consultation", one of those commandments, earlier than Atwood's article. This[0] was the earliest other one I could find, from a few months after Atwood's, which says "What Weinberg wrote in that book was a set of guidelines for developers working in a team environment to keep their egos separate from their code. In fact, I think these 10 guidelines.." - but in the book, although Weinberg talks frequently about "egoless programming", I can't see any (isolated) principles or guidelines, much less a list of commandments. I can't find an online version of McCarthy's Dynamics of Software Development to check what's in that. [0] https://www.techrepublic.com/article/the-ten-commandments-of-egoless-programming/ https://www.techrepublic.com/article/the-ten-commandments-of...
    - ImprobableTruth 5y ago
      An earlier article from techrepublic written in 2001: https://www.techrepublic.com/article/egoless-programming-the-path-to-better-code/ https://www.techrepublic.com/article/egoless-programming-the... This is the earliest google hit for "Ten Commandments for egoless programming". Curiously, the author, Lamont Adams, does not explicitly state that the commandments are from the book. Maybe "I present The (Almost) Ten Commandments for egoless programming" means that it's a summary by Adams?
      - yesenadam 5y ago
        Oh thanks! Yeah, seems Adams may well be the originator. p.s. I just wrote to him now asking about this! Maybe the truth will surface...
        pvg 5y ago
        Another person to ask, I suppose, is Atwood.
        pvg 5y ago
        I think a plausible explanation that fits all the bits and pieces is that Adams wrote this as a kind of riff of his own, inspired by the concept of 'Egoless Programming'. At some later point Atwood ran across some version of the 'commandments' list, thought they were quotes from the book and wrote his blog post. Thinking they were quotes, he probably didn't feel the need to cite where he found them. It's just a somewhat silly mistake, it happens - although it inadvertently spawned a mighty stream of Internet Wrongness. He should have probably updated and corrected the blog post when someone pointed out his mistake to him in 2016. He probably still should.