6 ms·

Bah that old thing again. FWIW the demo scene 'coders' call themselves that with pride, and usually those are often also brilliant 'programmers' and 'software e

Bah that old thing again. FWIW the demo scene 'coders' call themselves that with pride, and usually those are often also brilliant 'programmers' and 'software engineers'. Coder, programmer, software engineer call yourself whatever you want, the point is to make a computer do what you want it to do.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
KingLancelot 2y ago
[dead]
haswell 2y ago
Building a bridge and building a sand castle are two entirely different things. Each impressive in their own way, but clearly there is a difference both in terms of the skills required and the outcomes enabled. I think the specific term used matters less than the ability to distinguish between different types of building things. If you want to build a bridge, you’re not going to hire the sand castle builder if sand castles are all they have built.
- johnisgood 2y ago
  Yes, using a browser is different from writing a program, and there is a difference between "writing (or copy pasting) a script" and [...].
- 9rx 2y ago
  In this case they all refer to building the same thing, but at different steps in the process. Theoretically each step could be carried out by a different person, but in modern practice it would be quite unusual to do so – which is why they can be, and are, used interchangeably. If someone is doing one of them it is almost certain they are doing all of them.
netdevphoenix 2y ago
Imagine if people started calling constant functions, programs methods, etc. Words have meanings. Coder does imply that the key thing of those people is producing code the same cows make milk. Imagine calling an accountant a typist because the point is to make the computer do what you want it to do.
- whywhywhywhy 2y ago
  > Imagine calling an accountant a typist Bad analogy because accountants need to be qualified by a centralized body.
- boxed 2y ago
  > Imagine if people started calling constant functions We are already calling procedures "functions". So it's kinda game over already unfortunately.
- torstenvl 2y ago
  > the same cows make milk lol what? https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/milcher https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/milcher
  - netdevphoenix 2y ago
    Point was that coders are often valued by the amount of code they produced in the same way cows are value by the amount of milk they produce. I feel the usage of "coder" promotes this mentality
    - torstenvl 2y ago
      But it isn't true that "cows are valued by the amount of milk they produce" any more than "men are valued by the amount of code they produce." It's a false statement and a category error. In fact, many cows are not used for milk at all. Some breeds make for great dairy; some breeds make for great beef; but few are great for both... Dexter cattle maybe. (Nobody's out here clamoring for Black Angus cheese and absolutely nobody likes Jersey steak. While a Jersey cow or Holstein cow may be valued in part by the milk they produce, a Japanese Shorthorn or Belgian Blue cow is valued by the muscle tissue she produces and the genes that cause her offspring to produce similar muscle tissue.) Your comparison is a category error. The trait "is valued for milk production" does not pertain to the superclass of "cows" but only to the subclass of "milchers." "Coder" : code :: "milcher" : milk.
II2II 2y ago
> Coder, programmer, software engineer call yourself whatever you want, the point is to make a computer do what you want it to do. The distinction is important because how you make the computer do things is important in many cases. At one end of the spectrum, your wasting resources if you have a software engineer working on a program that will be used for 5 years. At the other end of the spectrum, you're setting yourself up for pain if the program is going to be in use for 30 years (or is safety critical, or must produce verifiable results, or ...). This isn't to say that the "hierarchy" should reflect some sort of software developer social class. It's just different skill-sets for different purposes.
- TimPC 2y ago
  When I made this decision 20 years ago I landed on Software Engineer because people calling themselves that generally earned more than people calling themselves programmer, coder or developer.
- School-Cotton 2y ago
  This hierarchy doesn’t actually exist in real life. Software engineer, programmer, “member of technical staff”, etc. are just all used interchangeably, at least in the US.
coro_1 2y ago
I laughed at this. Having a lovely fixed and unmovable perspective on many pursuits is so engineering. Coding, programming, etc, shapes our communications skills and our outlook in interesting ways. Dating truly benefits as well.
pron 2y ago
You clearly have not watched the talk. His point isn't that "coders" aren't "programmers", but that coding — i.e. the act of writing code, i.e. text in a programming language, i.e. text that can be interpreted and run by a computer — isn't the same as programming, which is the act of efficiently producing software that does what's expected of it. He attempts to show why only writing code is not the best way to produce software that does what's expected of it. You can agree or disagree, but it has nothing to do with how anyone calls themselves.
- CydeWeys 2y ago
  These fine-grained attempts at parsing the words to mean things other than how they are commonly used doesn't serve any purpose. Yes, of course the act of physically typing in characters in a programming language is not exactly the same thing about thinking about the algorithms you want the computer to do, but so what? It's trivial and it doesn't matter, and specifically using language to highlight that difference is pointless. To use an analogy, people will often say that "so and so website says X", but the website didn't actually say anything; it can't talk. What they mean is they read so and so text on a website. But we all know what they mean, and it's annoying and pointless to jump in to correct the language there. Similarly, it's annoying and pointless to pedantically argue that "well actually that's not programming, that's coding".
  - Workaccount2 2y ago
    >These fine-grained attempts at parsing the words to mean things other than how they are commonly used doesn't serve any purpose. It's meant to differentiate human "programmers" from AI "coders". Ever since LLM showed up there has been a noticeable urge to redefine the value proposition of software work to be less about what LLMs can do (write code) and more about what humans can do (write programs).
    - Swizec 2y ago
      > Ever since LLM showed up there has been a noticeable urge to redefine the value proposition of software work to be less about what LLMs can do (write code) and more about what humans can do (write programs). We’ve been having this debate for my entire career (since at least 2010). The suits have always misunderstood what programmers/engineers do and we’ve always pushed back explaining that it really is closer to city planning than to brick laying. The agile manifesto (2001) was in large part a response to these pressures to think of programmers as the people who “just implement” what the smart suits have already figured all out.
apples_oranges 2y ago
I like the term programmer because PG called himself that and I am a fan. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
gwbas1c 2y ago
I recently attended ICWMM, a conference of people who model stormwater for a living. Many of the people there technically program for a living, because some of their models rely on Python scripts. They are not software engineers. These aren't programs designed around security issues, or scalability issues, maintainability issues, or even following processes like pull requests.
- marpstar 2y ago
  This was something I didn't understand when choosing between "Computer Science" and "Software Engineering" as a major in college. At its simplest: "Engineering Software" is what people who build software products do. "Science with a Computer" is something that people doing real calculations, simulations, etc do. I, too, forget that the tools we use to build complex solutions can still be used by people who don't live in a text editor.
  - crazygringo 2y ago
    Computer science isn't "science with a computer". It's not about calculations and simulations. Computer science is the science of computation. It's more to do with theory of computation, information theory, data structures, algorithms, cryptography, databases. "Science with a computer" is experimental physics, chemisty, biology, etc.
  - hobofan 2y ago
    No! "Computer Science" != "Science with a Computer" "Computer science" (in contrast to software engineering) is the science that looks into the properties of computers and thing related to it (algorithms, database systems). E.g. examining those systems on a scientific level. Depending on how abstract that can have more or less direct input on how to engineer systems in their software/hardware implementations. "Science with a computer" on the other hand are usually (in terms of majors/academic disciplines) taught in the adjecent subfields: Bioinformatics, Chemoinformatics, Computational biology, etc.. Of course basic computing is also on some level seeping into every science subfield.
    - 2y ago
qwertox 2y ago
At least in Germany you can only call yourself a software engineer if you've got an actual engineering degree. > The professional title "engineer" is legally protected under the German Engineering Act [0]. [0] https://verwaltung.bund.de/leistungsverzeichnis/EN/leistung/99147006000000/herausgeber/BB-101725307/region/12 https://verwaltung.bund.de/leistungsverzeichnis/EN/leistung/...
- seanhunter 2y ago
  Oliver Heaviside[1] was rejected when he attempted to join the society of telegraph engineers because they said he was a clerk and not an engineer. Thing is, noone cares about them and his achievements live on. People protecting titles by putting an arbitrary barrier associated with possessing a piece of paper rather than actually having skill and knowledge should be treated with scorn in my opinion. [1] “Heaviside step function” and the “Coverup” method for partial fraction expansion when doing integrals are among his discoveries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Heaviside https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Heaviside
  - elcritch 2y ago
    While I agree with the sentiments, there is a societal need for gatekeepers in some professions. The engineer title often comes with legal liabilities. It’s not necessarily just about talent. Of course it often becomes misused as well.
    - sponaugle 2y ago
      "While I agree with the sentiments, there is a societal need for gatekeepers in some professions. The engineer title often comes with legal liabilities. It’s not necessarily just about talent. Of course it often becomes misused as well." I fixed this for you. "I disagree with the sentiments, there is no societal need for gatekeepers in most professions. The engineer title rarly comes with legal liabilities. It’s not necessarily just about gatekeeping. Of course it often becomes misused as well."
  - qwertox 2y ago
jmull 2y ago
IMO it's a pure waste of time to react to the headline without engaging the content.
- raimondious 2y ago
  The headline implies the content is a waste of time to engage with.
  - nh23423fefe 2y ago
    No it doesn't. The headline is ambiguous and you inserted your own biases without confirming they align with the real world.
  - tombert 2y ago
    Normally I agree, but this is a Lamport talk. His stuff is pretty much always worth engaging with. I have learned more from his writings than nearly any other human in my life.
- MattSayar 2y ago
  For those who think tl;dw here's a PDF of the talk linked on the page https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/sites/default/files/presentations/linux-expo%20%281%29.pdf https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/sites/default/files/presentat... After reading the whole thing I'm not sure how the title describes the presentation.
  - anotherevan 2y ago
    450 page (slide) PDF. We need a tl;dr on the tl;dw.
    - forgotpwd16 2y ago
      Some slides are just a series with text slowly revealed. If merge them down is <1/5 of this number (the page counting ends with 41 which should've been 42 since ending slide is distinct from previous).
fm2606 2y ago
At my org they are trying to move away from programmer/analyst to sowftware engineer. I told my manager call me what ever you want, just don't call me late to dinner. As long as it never gets to "grokker" (I've never heard the term "grokker", just saying) . I can not stand the term "grok". I don't know why but it just grates on me
jsbg 2y ago
> Coder, programmer, software engineer call yourself whatever you want, the point is to make a computer do what you want it to do. That is definitely not what software engineering is. It requires translating requirements and ensuring that the code is maintainable in the context of a team and the product's lifecycle.
- harlanji 2y ago
  Yes. Simply put, Software Engineering is Programming over time. As Calculus is to Algebra.
  - osti 2y ago
    I get what you mean but calculus and algebra are quite distinct branches of mathematics..
    - mystified5016 2y ago
      And the argument is that software engineering is quite distinct from coding.
      - osti 2y ago
        No, he said software engineering is just programming over time, so the two are not distinct at all.
- lxgr 2y ago
  Which is still, in the end, making the computer what you want it to do – in a "do as I mean, not as I say" way.
- zamalek 2y ago
  As a job, at least. Programming does not exist exclusively in that realm, hence the demo scene.
- bitpush 2y ago
  I understand where you're coming from but a hobby "coder" making computer do little things is also 'translating requirements' and doing all the things a software engineer/code/programmer is doing. If you still disagree, point me to a place where I can find some coders
crsv 2y ago
Hear, hear!
BinaryPie 2y ago
You forgot "hacker" :D

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

KingLancelot 2y ago

[dead]

haswell 2y ago

Building a bridge and building a sand castle are two entirely different things. Each impressive in their own way, but clearly there is a difference both in terms of the skills required and the outcomes enabled. I think the specific term used matters less than the ability to distinguish between different types of building things. If you want to build a bridge, you’re not going to hire the sand castle builder if sand castles are all they have built.

johnisgood 2y ago
Yes, using a browser is different from writing a program, and there is a difference between "writing (or copy pasting) a script" and [...].
9rx 2y ago
In this case they all refer to building the same thing, but at different steps in the process. Theoretically each step could be carried out by a different person, but in modern practice it would be quite unusual to do so – which is why they can be, and are, used interchangeably. If someone is doing one of them it is almost certain they are doing all of them.

netdevphoenix 2y ago

Imagine if people started calling constant functions, programs methods, etc. Words have meanings. Coder does imply that the key thing of those people is producing code the same cows make milk. Imagine calling an accountant a typist because the point is to make the computer do what you want it to do.

whywhywhywhy 2y ago
> Imagine calling an accountant a typist Bad analogy because accountants need to be qualified by a centralized body.
boxed 2y ago
> Imagine if people started calling constant functions We are already calling procedures "functions". So it's kinda game over already unfortunately.
torstenvl 2y ago
> the same cows make milk lol what? https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/milcher https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/milcher
- netdevphoenix 2y ago
  Point was that coders are often valued by the amount of code they produced in the same way cows are value by the amount of milk they produce. I feel the usage of "coder" promotes this mentality
  - torstenvl 2y ago
    But it isn't true that "cows are valued by the amount of milk they produce" any more than "men are valued by the amount of code they produce." It's a false statement and a category error. In fact, many cows are not used for milk at all. Some breeds make for great dairy; some breeds make for great beef; but few are great for both... Dexter cattle maybe. (Nobody's out here clamoring for Black Angus cheese and absolutely nobody likes Jersey steak. While a Jersey cow or Holstein cow may be valued in part by the milk they produce, a Japanese Shorthorn or Belgian Blue cow is valued by the muscle tissue she produces and the genes that cause her offspring to produce similar muscle tissue.) Your comparison is a category error. The trait "is valued for milk production" does not pertain to the superclass of "cows" but only to the subclass of "milchers." "Coder" : code :: "milcher" : milk.

II2II 2y ago

> Coder, programmer, software engineer call yourself whatever you want, the point is to make a computer do what you want it to do. The distinction is important because how you make the computer do things is important in many cases. At one end of the spectrum, your wasting resources if you have a software engineer working on a program that will be used for 5 years. At the other end of the spectrum, you're setting yourself up for pain if the program is going to be in use for 30 years (or is safety critical, or must produce verifiable results, or ...). This isn't to say that the "hierarchy" should reflect some sort of software developer social class. It's just different skill-sets for different purposes.

TimPC 2y ago
When I made this decision 20 years ago I landed on Software Engineer because people calling themselves that generally earned more than people calling themselves programmer, coder or developer.
School-Cotton 2y ago
This hierarchy doesn’t actually exist in real life. Software engineer, programmer, “member of technical staff”, etc. are just all used interchangeably, at least in the US.

coro_1 2y ago

I laughed at this. Having a lovely fixed and unmovable perspective on many pursuits is so engineering. Coding, programming, etc, shapes our communications skills and our outlook in interesting ways. Dating truly benefits as well.

pron 2y ago

You clearly have not watched the talk. His point isn't that "coders" aren't "programmers", but that coding — i.e. the act of writing code, i.e. text in a programming language, i.e. text that can be interpreted and run by a computer — isn't the same as programming, which is the act of efficiently producing software that does what's expected of it. He attempts to show why only writing code is not the best way to produce software that does what's expected of it. You can agree or disagree, but it has nothing to do with how anyone calls themselves.

CydeWeys 2y ago
These fine-grained attempts at parsing the words to mean things other than how they are commonly used doesn't serve any purpose. Yes, of course the act of physically typing in characters in a programming language is not exactly the same thing about thinking about the algorithms you want the computer to do, but so what? It's trivial and it doesn't matter, and specifically using language to highlight that difference is pointless. To use an analogy, people will often say that "so and so website says X", but the website didn't actually say anything; it can't talk. What they mean is they read so and so text on a website. But we all know what they mean, and it's annoying and pointless to jump in to correct the language there. Similarly, it's annoying and pointless to pedantically argue that "well actually that's not programming, that's coding".
- Workaccount2 2y ago
  >These fine-grained attempts at parsing the words to mean things other than how they are commonly used doesn't serve any purpose. It's meant to differentiate human "programmers" from AI "coders". Ever since LLM showed up there has been a noticeable urge to redefine the value proposition of software work to be less about what LLMs can do (write code) and more about what humans can do (write programs).
  - Swizec 2y ago
    > Ever since LLM showed up there has been a noticeable urge to redefine the value proposition of software work to be less about what LLMs can do (write code) and more about what humans can do (write programs). We’ve been having this debate for my entire career (since at least 2010). The suits have always misunderstood what programmers/engineers do and we’ve always pushed back explaining that it really is closer to city planning than to brick laying. The agile manifesto (2001) was in large part a response to these pressures to think of programmers as the people who “just implement” what the smart suits have already figured all out.

apples_oranges 2y ago

I like the term programmer because PG called himself that and I am a fan. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

gwbas1c 2y ago

I recently attended ICWMM, a conference of people who model stormwater for a living. Many of the people there technically program for a living, because some of their models rely on Python scripts. They are not software engineers. These aren't programs designed around security issues, or scalability issues, maintainability issues, or even following processes like pull requests.

marpstar 2y ago
This was something I didn't understand when choosing between "Computer Science" and "Software Engineering" as a major in college. At its simplest: "Engineering Software" is what people who build software products do. "Science with a Computer" is something that people doing real calculations, simulations, etc do. I, too, forget that the tools we use to build complex solutions can still be used by people who don't live in a text editor.
- crazygringo 2y ago
  Computer science isn't "science with a computer". It's not about calculations and simulations. Computer science is the science of computation. It's more to do with theory of computation, information theory, data structures, algorithms, cryptography, databases. "Science with a computer" is experimental physics, chemisty, biology, etc.
- hobofan 2y ago
  No! "Computer Science" != "Science with a Computer" "Computer science" (in contrast to software engineering) is the science that looks into the properties of computers and thing related to it (algorithms, database systems). E.g. examining those systems on a scientific level. Depending on how abstract that can have more or less direct input on how to engineer systems in their software/hardware implementations. "Science with a computer" on the other hand are usually (in terms of majors/academic disciplines) taught in the adjecent subfields: Bioinformatics, Chemoinformatics, Computational biology, etc.. Of course basic computing is also on some level seeping into every science subfield.
  - 2y ago

qwertox 2y ago

At least in Germany you can only call yourself a software engineer if you've got an actual engineering degree. > The professional title "engineer" is legally protected under the German Engineering Act [0]. [0] https://verwaltung.bund.de/leistungsverzeichnis/EN/leistung/99147006000000/herausgeber/BB-101725307/region/12 https://verwaltung.bund.de/leistungsverzeichnis/EN/leistung/...

seanhunter 2y ago
Oliver Heaviside[1] was rejected when he attempted to join the society of telegraph engineers because they said he was a clerk and not an engineer. Thing is, noone cares about them and his achievements live on. People protecting titles by putting an arbitrary barrier associated with possessing a piece of paper rather than actually having skill and knowledge should be treated with scorn in my opinion. [1] “Heaviside step function” and the “Coverup” method for partial fraction expansion when doing integrals are among his discoveries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Heaviside https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Heaviside
- elcritch 2y ago
  While I agree with the sentiments, there is a societal need for gatekeepers in some professions. The engineer title often comes with legal liabilities. It’s not necessarily just about talent. Of course it often becomes misused as well.
  - sponaugle 2y ago
    "While I agree with the sentiments, there is a societal need for gatekeepers in some professions. The engineer title often comes with legal liabilities. It’s not necessarily just about talent. Of course it often becomes misused as well." I fixed this for you. "I disagree with the sentiments, there is no societal need for gatekeepers in most professions. The engineer title rarly comes with legal liabilities. It’s not necessarily just about gatekeeping. Of course it often becomes misused as well."
- qwertox 2y ago

jmull 2y ago

IMO it's a pure waste of time to react to the headline without engaging the content.

raimondious 2y ago
The headline implies the content is a waste of time to engage with.
- nh23423fefe 2y ago
  No it doesn't. The headline is ambiguous and you inserted your own biases without confirming they align with the real world.
- tombert 2y ago
  Normally I agree, but this is a Lamport talk. His stuff is pretty much always worth engaging with. I have learned more from his writings than nearly any other human in my life.
MattSayar 2y ago
For those who think tl;dw here's a PDF of the talk linked on the page https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/sites/default/files/presentations/linux-expo%20%281%29.pdf https://www.socallinuxexpo.org/sites/default/files/presentat... After reading the whole thing I'm not sure how the title describes the presentation.
- anotherevan 2y ago
  450 page (slide) PDF. We need a tl;dr on the tl;dw.
  - forgotpwd16 2y ago
    Some slides are just a series with text slowly revealed. If merge them down is <1/5 of this number (the page counting ends with 41 which should've been 42 since ending slide is distinct from previous).

fm2606 2y ago

At my org they are trying to move away from programmer/analyst to sowftware engineer. I told my manager call me what ever you want, just don't call me late to dinner. As long as it never gets to "grokker" (I've never heard the term "grokker", just saying) . I can not stand the term "grok". I don't know why but it just grates on me

jsbg 2y ago

> Coder, programmer, software engineer call yourself whatever you want, the point is to make a computer do what you want it to do. That is definitely not what software engineering is. It requires translating requirements and ensuring that the code is maintainable in the context of a team and the product's lifecycle.

harlanji 2y ago
Yes. Simply put, Software Engineering is Programming over time. As Calculus is to Algebra.
- osti 2y ago
  I get what you mean but calculus and algebra are quite distinct branches of mathematics..
  - mystified5016 2y ago
    And the argument is that software engineering is quite distinct from coding.
    - osti 2y ago
      No, he said software engineering is just programming over time, so the two are not distinct at all.
lxgr 2y ago
Which is still, in the end, making the computer what you want it to do – in a "do as I mean, not as I say" way.
zamalek 2y ago
As a job, at least. Programming does not exist exclusively in that realm, hence the demo scene.
bitpush 2y ago
I understand where you're coming from but a hobby "coder" making computer do little things is also 'translating requirements' and doing all the things a software engineer/code/programmer is doing. If you still disagree, point me to a place where I can find some coders

crsv 2y ago

Hear, hear!

BinaryPie 2y ago

You forgot "hacker" :D