6 ms·

Nobody Hates Software More Than Software Developers

87 points by Mintz 17y ago

biotech 17y ago
In fact, I think you can tell a competent software developer from an incompetent one with a single interview question: What's the worst code you've seen recently? If their answer isn't immediately and without any hesitation these two words: My own. Then you should end the interview immediately. Sorry, pal. It seems to me that few programmers would answer the question this way, competent or not. And it's probably not true for most competent programmers... I wonder if Jeff has actually received this answer from a interviewee.
- hvs 17y ago
  I know I've said it in a number of interviews and have gotten offers from all but one of them. I don't know if I'd recommend it unless you can follow it up with a strong explanation of why it was the worst -- and how you fixed it -- but it isn't an interview killer, IMO. I agree with Jeff on this one. Some of my worst experiences with code has been going back over stuff that I wrote 3-5 years ago. I'm pretty hard on crappy developers, so I'm doubly hard on myself when I look back at some of the boneheaded mistakes and decisions I've made.
- ajg1977 17y ago
  Given this statement and others on his blog/podcast, I'd be curious to know what experience Jeff has of interviewing people.
edw519 17y ago
In fact, I think you can tell a competent software developer from an incompetent one with a single interview question: What's the worst code you've seen recently? If their answer isn't immediately and without any hesitation these two words: My own. Then you should end the interview immediately. Sorry, pal. You don't hate software enough yet. Maybe in a few more years. If you keep at it. I have always enjoyed Jeff's columns and maybe I'm missing a subtle point (or just taking the bait), but this may be the worst "advice" I've ever read on hn. If someone told me that the worst code they've seen recently was their own, I'd wonder why. I feel confident in my own ability to usually write excellent code on the first try. Sure, it may need some refactoring, optimization, and flushing out of features, but it works, it generally works well, is very well documented, and can be easily enhanced by myself or someone else. If it's not right on the first try, I will fix it before I promote it. Shame on me (and anyone else for that matter) for leaving behind garbage for someone else to inherit. I've cleaned up far too many messes to allow myself to become like that. I'm probably not alone when I say that I love developing new code and often hate maintaining someone else's mess. Jeff is right about one thing though, almost everything I ever inherited was crap in one way or another, probably written by someone "less than senior". I'd rephrase the whole interview question: "What's the second worst code you've seen recently?" "My own." "OK then, what's the worst?" "Everyone else's." That's the one I would hire.
- Mintz 17y ago
  The irony of you saying "almost everything I ever inherited was crap in one way or another" is that somebody probably said the exact same thing about your code. I bet you write amazing code, but when given a choice, programmers would rather have the joy of creating their own code than trying to interpret someone else's.
  - edw519 17y ago
    When it comes to maintaining code, I believe there are 2 kinds of crap: subjective (I don't like it) and objective (it's crap because of these 14 specific reasons). You're probably right about people who inherit my code. I know, when they've whined about it, I confronted them. "Please show me exactly what's wrong with it. What are your specific complaints about violations?" I rarely got an objective answer. It was usually something about formatting, indenting, variable names too long, variable names too short, I'm use to it the way we did it (wrongly) at XYZ Co., something like that. True crap can be objectively identified by a violation such as: - variables named so that no one except King Tut could possibly figure out what they are - the same variables used for different purpose at the same time, usually in nested recursions - variables named with 1 or 2 characters - unassigned variables - variables initiated when they shouldn't be - division by zero - single entry, multiple exit (heavily maintained so that now outlying cases skip critical logic) - the same code in multiple places (only some of it maintained so that outlying cases skip critical logic) - endless recursions (for outlying cases only, naturally) - comments that don't agree with the code - data base tables with no definitions either in the schema or any code (my new favorite) I could go on and on, but you kinda get the picture. I wonder how many readers here have posted crap like this on their "wall of shame" at one time or another. It's funny the first 2^n times. Not so much fun anymore.
    - mahmud 17y ago
      Those are technical issues. The truly most nightmarish software to inherit is one that shouldn't have been writen to begin with: software made by people who either lack the programming skills, or the domain knowledge. Nothing worse than an accountant-turned-DBA's perl, or a system's programmer that just left you an steaming pile of MFC GUI. Worst of all, the person responsible for the mess is not long gone and forgotten, quite the contrary, he has been promoted through and he is now responsible for interviewing you to polish his brown magnum opus. I breath a sigh of relief whenever Microsoft breaks and old DLL's compatibility: when you can't push through for an upgrade, pray for Redmond to force it. [Update: ``The hardware-specific accounting package'' This one is truly the "winar": plain-jane boring software that for some goddamn reason depends on that old Hayes modem, or this matrix printer. I have been hired to do this shit so often it's not even funny; it tends to sneak past the initial discussions. You tick off "GUI" and "ODBC" and you're on your way to start hacking, making a mental note about "ability to print". What you don't know is that, not only do they want to convert the old Access package to an intranet web app, but they also want it to print receipts using the "receipt printer" -- a custom made piece of pain that uses the parallel port for data, the serial for control, and two RJ45s to whistle the Danish national anthem on error. FUCK!]
tdavis 17y ago
You should consider your code to suck over time, if you're "doing it right". If you keep learning new and better techniques and practices, old code starts to look immature. If you code in the real world, you make compromises to get a project launched before you're living in an alleyway. TicketStumbler may be a steaming pile of crap in some places and my deployment strategy may have devolved to "install random packages until it stops throwing internal errors", but it was not always this way. Not only have I managed to become an even more amazing programmer in the past year (against all odds), but I've had to cut so many corners the whole thing is beginning to look like a circle. These two factors, above all others, have caused me to rather loathe my code. But that doesn't mean I always do. Maybe this was the point Jeff was attempting to make? If I am only good by hating all my code, I don't see how I could ever be good.
Oompa 17y ago
I don't understand who votes these articles up anymore. They're just completely useless.
- sofal 17y ago
  Not as useless as your comment. Besides the "my code is the worst code" part, I thought he did an excellent job of explaining a software developer's natural aversion to software. I had my wife read it, and it helped her understand more about why I refused to pollute the computer with that CD that came with her new camera. Aside: I know it's a beloved HN meme to bash Atwood, but don't let that excuse us from being lazy about it.
  - Oompa 17y ago
    My comment does serve a purpose, to point out how useless this article is, since some people obviously don't notice it, and vote it up.
    - sofal 17y ago
      Your comment did not point out anything other than the fact that you personally think Atwood's articles are useless. It did not contribute anything to the discussion, and it garnered knee-jerk upvotes from people who, like you, hate Atwood's articles. I don't often downvote, and I never downvote for disagreement. I downvote comments that either add nothing or take away from the discussion, and your comment was a perfect example of that. If you have a particular problem with this article, then follow the example of edw519 and elaborate.
    - wglb 17y ago
      However, I find myself voting up some articles that I wouldn't recommend, but the comments have lots of value.
fogus 17y ago
Extrapolated... Programming will make you hate software. Programming will make you hate programmers. Programming will make you hate computers. Lisp will make you forget all of that.
- mahmud 17y ago
  Lisp is crack. Your eyes are rolling in with pleasure and you're the king of the world, but your expressed sense of delight is not commensurate with people's idea of what should be enjoyable and by how much, even your programmer peers (should programming really be that fun?) And to be honest, you're just getting off writing skeletal Idealized software; your toy apps lack the necessary cruft to face a stupid world, so no one ever sees it. As time passes, you're left huddled over your workstation firing dopamines like any other fiend, and the world moves on in its crisply pressed suits, doing hard work and getting social validation and recognition for it. You, on the other hand, are left flailing your arms, feeling the music, offering the Love and the Message to others as they avoid making eye contact.
  - fogus 17y ago
    Isn't that what I said? :p
    - mahmud 17y ago
      You weren't long-winded enough.
rapind 17y ago
I completely agree that pretty much every proprietary software product that has come bundled with a device I purchased has been useless crap. There's probably one or two exceptions but I can't think of them. I didn't find the rest of the article that interesting, but he definitely nailed his first point. It's not so much bad programming, it's more a case of why? Why do I want to install something that by default will chew up memory by running in the background (and default to launch on startup), that I will never use, because I have so many better tools for the job. I guess the argument is that it's useful for non power-users... Umm sure. How many of you have been asked to fix something on a relative or friends windows box only to find it grindingly slow because of all the run-time resident crap running on it? Like 10 things in the system tray? Update notifications launching one after another on boot? My first task is usually removing all of this stuff they NEVER use before even tackling the real problem they're having.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
bonaldi 17y ago
I'm a little bit nervous to say this, but this is another of Jeff's articles where I think "man, so many of this guy's problems would go away if he didn't hate Macs so much". In my experience, Mac devs don't hate software, and Mac users don't have the instinctive "oh [App X I haven't heard of]? That's going to suck". Gruber talked more about this in his Broken Windows essay -- http://daringfireball.net/2004/06/broken_windows http://daringfireball.net/2004/06/broken_windows -- and what he said about security is generally true for quality and polish as well. If I get a new app for the Mac, I know that it's going to have basic standards of fit and finish and will make a reasonable attempt at being a good Mac citizen, because otherwise the community will kill it. When a new Mac app comes out, I'm usually fairly optimistic about what it will do. When a new Windows one appears, I'm sceptical. This doesn't extend all the way to the quality of coding admittedly, but certainly at least until the iPhone came out Cocoa devs were a fairly select set of committed people, and the higher barrier to entry helped keep at least some of the crappiest C&P coders out of the platform.
- philwelch 17y ago
  Not even having a Mac saves you from the crapware hardware makers bundle with their crap. You have no idea how annoying it was for me to have to remove shitty Kodak photo management software from my parents' Mac (which had a perfectly good version of iPhoto) or the horrific, kernel-panic-causing HP All-In-One software. Or even the shitty Verison DSL setup CD I was supposed to use to set up my DSL modem.
- zmimon 17y ago
  Apple is it's own worse enemy here - while there is beautiful software on the Mac and the standard is in general above what I think you find on windows, the software that Apple itself makes for windows is generally awful and this drives the perceptions of a lot of windows users. For example, iTunes is still the one piece of software that gets me into a flying rage - usually when I want to do something stupidly simple and it refuses to let me due to some preconceived user workflow that I would be violating. It freezes and hangs at weird moments, the UI lacks all kinds of normal Windows niceties like tooltips and hover highlighting, things that are vitally important to click on are rendered as if they are not clickable at all, and in general it looks completely out of place. The message that Windows users get from this kind of thing is that Macs are foreign and hostile and incomprehensible and the idea of spending your whole life in that environment is repellent. Strangely when I use the same software on the Mac it all makes sense - I can't even really explain why.
andrewf 17y ago
Awareness of your own limits, and the likely quality of your work, is a good thing. But this descends into self-flagellation. Waaaah, I suck, you suck, we all suck. We're all the equal-worst programmers EVER. If you're doing research into programming languages, and you're explaining your work, or asking for funding, fine. But coming from practicing programmers, it's a common, trite, pointless and irritating refrain containing zero useful information.
gaius 17y ago
"How do I know, incontrovertibly, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that the world is full of incompetent programmers? Because I'm one of them!" Those who can, code. Those who can't, blog.
- alxp 17y ago
  Pissing on Jeff's coding ability became passé when he put out the best programming Q&A site out there. You need new material.
geebee 17y ago
I remember that scene from "War of the Roses" where the Danny DeVito character tells the horror story of the Roses to talk a new client out of engaging in an ugly and bitter courtroom battle. I think his line was (paraphrasing here) "when a man who could charge you $250 an hour wants to tell you something for free, you should listen." I often feel that way about software. Remember the stages of a software project? 1) wild enthusiasm 2) profound disillusionment 3) search for the guilty 4) punishment of the innocent 5) rewards and accolades for the non-participants Can't remember exactly where I read that, but software developers have experienced them all, over and over. I don't necessarily try to talk people out of a new development effort. After all, there are clearly times when we need to write software, and some projects are smashing successes. But I kind of feel like that breed of lawyer who tries to get clients to see litigation as a true last resort. I say - is there anything already out there that could solve your problems without a new development effort? How far would a much simpler approach go toward solving your problems - could you live with it? Basically, I want clients to understand just how risky a full blown development effort truly is. Of course, if you need business... well, nothing like an angry divorce to keep the billable hours up, and nothing like a flailing software project funded by deep pockets to keep the cash flow positive....
wglb 17y ago
There is a lot of value in the comments on this article, but I am afraid that the idea that you can usefully hire someone based on the answer to one question is a bit oversimplified. In any project that I have done that spans any length of time, often the first code I wrote doesn't look up to snuff with what I wrote most recently. The later code looks better by virtue of a better feel for the environment and the tools and some obscure abbreviation-finder that seems to be at work in the background. One concern that I would have if you think the worst code that you have seen is stuff you wrote, perhaps you are not reading enough of other people's code. I bet there is a lot of that amongst us all. In the vein of simple questions that help in an interview, particularly for someone who purports to be an expert, is "Tell me five ways that it won't work". An expert ought to have some scars, and have learned from them, no?
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
ggchappell 17y ago
I think this article makes some good points, and I found myself nodding a lot. On the other hand, it (along with some of the HN comments) conflates a couple of unrelated issues: (1) how well software is written, and (2) whether software forces me to do things I don't want to do. One of the parts I nodded along with, was his story of lunging for the computer when the camera software CD was inserted. But this doesn't have anything to do with whether the source of this software was readable, variable names, etc., nor is it related to the competence of the programmers or whether they are aware of their own failings. The issue is that such software is often written with a view toward taking over the way I do things. I want to do things my way. That's the reason for my move from Windows to Linux, and it's why I use Firefox instead of IE when I do use Windows. It's why I avoid Flash when feasible, why I hate most children's educational software, and why I would not even glance at the software that came with a camera. Does this have anything to do with the quality of the code involved in these programs? I don't think so.
ajg1977 17y ago
As usual Atwood manages to destroy a valid perspective (be mindful of your code quality) with unnecessary hyperbole. I wouldn't hire anyone who said their own code was the worst they'd seen recently. Whatever points they may win for perception and awareness are totally overshadowed by their lazy acceptance of the situation. "Which areas of your coding could you most improve on?" - now that is a question worth asking,
cloudhead 17y ago
What you'll end up with is hiring either incompetent programmers who know they're incompetent, or people with no self-esteem. Great. It seems more like either Jeff is incompetent (which he admits to) or self-deprecating, and assumes everyone else is.
miguelpais 17y ago
Clearly the main issue of the post is the answer to the interview question. Although I think it's a very good answer and that to me it would probably mean I would be hiring a guy which is humble, which always views his knowledge has something that still could be better and has a view of his own code has something imperfect, and so he tries very hard to always know more and improve, and that would mean in the end he is just one of the best choices to hire, I think that in most companies that guy would never be hired. Although it sucks, nobody gives any value to humility anymore. They want the confident, "I'm an expert" kind of guy, so giving as answer that the worst code you've seen lately is your own, without any kind of explanation of why you think that (that you view your knowledge has something which as always a long way to go) would probably be a instant KO to the poor humble interviewee.

87 points by Mintz 17y ago

hvs 17y ago
I know I've said it in a number of interviews and have gotten offers from all but one of them. I don't know if I'd recommend it unless you can follow it up with a strong explanation of why it was the worst -- and how you fixed it -- but it isn't an interview killer, IMO. I agree with Jeff on this one. Some of my worst experiences with code has been going back over stuff that I wrote 3-5 years ago. I'm pretty hard on crappy developers, so I'm doubly hard on myself when I look back at some of the boneheaded mistakes and decisions I've made.
ajg1977 17y ago
Given this statement and others on his blog/podcast, I'd be curious to know what experience Jeff has of interviewing people.

In fact, I think you can tell a competent software developer from an incompetent one with a single interview question: What's the worst code you've seen recently? If their answer isn't immediately and without any hesitation these two words: My own. Then you should end the interview immediately. Sorry, pal. You don't hate software enough yet. Maybe in a few more years. If you keep at it. I have always enjoyed Jeff's columns and maybe I'm missing a subtle point (or just taking the bait), but this may be the worst "advice" I've ever read on hn. If someone told me that the worst code they've seen recently was their own, I'd wonder why. I feel confident in my own ability to usually write excellent code on the first try. Sure, it may need some refactoring, optimization, and flushing out of features, but it works, it generally works well, is very well documented, and can be easily enhanced by myself or someone else. If it's not right on the first try, I will fix it before I promote it. Shame on me (and anyone else for that matter) for leaving behind garbage for someone else to inherit. I've cleaned up far too many messes to allow myself to become like that. I'm probably not alone when I say that I love developing new code and often hate maintaining someone else's mess. Jeff is right about one thing though, almost everything I ever inherited was crap in one way or another, probably written by someone "less than senior". I'd rephrase the whole interview question: "What's the second worst code you've seen recently?" "My own." "OK then, what's the worst?" "Everyone else's." That's the one I would hire.

Mintz 17y ago
The irony of you saying "almost everything I ever inherited was crap in one way or another" is that somebody probably said the exact same thing about your code. I bet you write amazing code, but when given a choice, programmers would rather have the joy of creating their own code than trying to interpret someone else's.
- edw519 17y ago
  When it comes to maintaining code, I believe there are 2 kinds of crap: subjective (I don't like it) and objective (it's crap because of these 14 specific reasons). You're probably right about people who inherit my code. I know, when they've whined about it, I confronted them. "Please show me exactly what's wrong with it. What are your specific complaints about violations?" I rarely got an objective answer. It was usually something about formatting, indenting, variable names too long, variable names too short, I'm use to it the way we did it (wrongly) at XYZ Co., something like that. True crap can be objectively identified by a violation such as: - variables named so that no one except King Tut could possibly figure out what they are - the same variables used for different purpose at the same time, usually in nested recursions - variables named with 1 or 2 characters - unassigned variables - variables initiated when they shouldn't be - division by zero - single entry, multiple exit (heavily maintained so that now outlying cases skip critical logic) - the same code in multiple places (only some of it maintained so that outlying cases skip critical logic) - endless recursions (for outlying cases only, naturally) - comments that don't agree with the code - data base tables with no definitions either in the schema or any code (my new favorite) I could go on and on, but you kinda get the picture. I wonder how many readers here have posted crap like this on their "wall of shame" at one time or another. It's funny the first 2^n times. Not so much fun anymore.
  - mahmud 17y ago
    Those are technical issues. The truly most nightmarish software to inherit is one that shouldn't have been writen to begin with: software made by people who either lack the programming skills, or the domain knowledge. Nothing worse than an accountant-turned-DBA's perl, or a system's programmer that just left you an steaming pile of MFC GUI. Worst of all, the person responsible for the mess is not long gone and forgotten, quite the contrary, he has been promoted through and he is now responsible for interviewing you to polish his brown magnum opus. I breath a sigh of relief whenever Microsoft breaks and old DLL's compatibility: when you can't push through for an upgrade, pray for Redmond to force it. [Update: ``The hardware-specific accounting package'' This one is truly the "winar": plain-jane boring software that for some goddamn reason depends on that old Hayes modem, or this matrix printer. I have been hired to do this shit so often it's not even funny; it tends to sneak past the initial discussions. You tick off "GUI" and "ODBC" and you're on your way to start hacking, making a mental note about "ability to print". What you don't know is that, not only do they want to convert the old Access package to an intranet web app, but they also want it to print receipts using the "receipt printer" -- a custom made piece of pain that uses the parallel port for data, the serial for control, and two RJ45s to whistle the Danish national anthem on error. FUCK!]

tdavis 17y ago

You should consider your code to suck over time, if you're "doing it right". If you keep learning new and better techniques and practices, old code starts to look immature. If you code in the real world, you make compromises to get a project launched before you're living in an alleyway. TicketStumbler may be a steaming pile of crap in some places and my deployment strategy may have devolved to "install random packages until it stops throwing internal errors", but it was not always this way. Not only have I managed to become an even more amazing programmer in the past year (against all odds), but I've had to cut so many corners the whole thing is beginning to look like a circle. These two factors, above all others, have caused me to rather loathe my code. But that doesn't mean I always do. Maybe this was the point Jeff was attempting to make? If I am only good by hating all my code, I don't see how I could ever be good.

Oompa 17y ago

I don't understand who votes these articles up anymore. They're just completely useless.

sofal 17y ago
Not as useless as your comment. Besides the "my code is the worst code" part, I thought he did an excellent job of explaining a software developer's natural aversion to software. I had my wife read it, and it helped her understand more about why I refused to pollute the computer with that CD that came with her new camera. Aside: I know it's a beloved HN meme to bash Atwood, but don't let that excuse us from being lazy about it.
- Oompa 17y ago
  My comment does serve a purpose, to point out how useless this article is, since some people obviously don't notice it, and vote it up.
  - sofal 17y ago
    Your comment did not point out anything other than the fact that you personally think Atwood's articles are useless. It did not contribute anything to the discussion, and it garnered knee-jerk upvotes from people who, like you, hate Atwood's articles. I don't often downvote, and I never downvote for disagreement. I downvote comments that either add nothing or take away from the discussion, and your comment was a perfect example of that. If you have a particular problem with this article, then follow the example of edw519 and elaborate.
  - wglb 17y ago
    However, I find myself voting up some articles that I wouldn't recommend, but the comments have lots of value.

fogus 17y ago

Extrapolated... Programming will make you hate software. Programming will make you hate programmers. Programming will make you hate computers. Lisp will make you forget all of that.

mahmud 17y ago
Lisp is crack. Your eyes are rolling in with pleasure and you're the king of the world, but your expressed sense of delight is not commensurate with people's idea of what should be enjoyable and by how much, even your programmer peers (should programming really be that fun?) And to be honest, you're just getting off writing skeletal Idealized software; your toy apps lack the necessary cruft to face a stupid world, so no one ever sees it. As time passes, you're left huddled over your workstation firing dopamines like any other fiend, and the world moves on in its crisply pressed suits, doing hard work and getting social validation and recognition for it. You, on the other hand, are left flailing your arms, feeling the music, offering the Love and the Message to others as they avoid making eye contact.
- fogus 17y ago
  Isn't that what I said? :p
  - mahmud 17y ago
    You weren't long-winded enough.

rapind 17y ago

I completely agree that pretty much every proprietary software product that has come bundled with a device I purchased has been useless crap. There's probably one or two exceptions but I can't think of them. I didn't find the rest of the article that interesting, but he definitely nailed his first point. It's not so much bad programming, it's more a case of why? Why do I want to install something that by default will chew up memory by running in the background (and default to launch on startup), that I will never use, because I have so many better tools for the job. I guess the argument is that it's useful for non power-users... Umm sure. How many of you have been asked to fix something on a relative or friends windows box only to find it grindingly slow because of all the run-time resident crap running on it? Like 10 things in the system tray? Update notifications launching one after another on boot? My first task is usually removing all of this stuff they NEVER use before even tackling the real problem they're having.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]

bonaldi 17y ago

I'm a little bit nervous to say this, but this is another of Jeff's articles where I think "man, so many of this guy's problems would go away if he didn't hate Macs so much". In my experience, Mac devs don't hate software, and Mac users don't have the instinctive "oh [App X I haven't heard of]? That's going to suck". Gruber talked more about this in his Broken Windows essay -- http://daringfireball.net/2004/06/broken_windows http://daringfireball.net/2004/06/broken_windows -- and what he said about security is generally true for quality and polish as well. If I get a new app for the Mac, I know that it's going to have basic standards of fit and finish and will make a reasonable attempt at being a good Mac citizen, because otherwise the community will kill it. When a new Mac app comes out, I'm usually fairly optimistic about what it will do. When a new Windows one appears, I'm sceptical. This doesn't extend all the way to the quality of coding admittedly, but certainly at least until the iPhone came out Cocoa devs were a fairly select set of committed people, and the higher barrier to entry helped keep at least some of the crappiest C&P coders out of the platform.

philwelch 17y ago
Not even having a Mac saves you from the crapware hardware makers bundle with their crap. You have no idea how annoying it was for me to have to remove shitty Kodak photo management software from my parents' Mac (which had a perfectly good version of iPhoto) or the horrific, kernel-panic-causing HP All-In-One software. Or even the shitty Verison DSL setup CD I was supposed to use to set up my DSL modem.
zmimon 17y ago
Apple is it's own worse enemy here - while there is beautiful software on the Mac and the standard is in general above what I think you find on windows, the software that Apple itself makes for windows is generally awful and this drives the perceptions of a lot of windows users. For example, iTunes is still the one piece of software that gets me into a flying rage - usually when I want to do something stupidly simple and it refuses to let me due to some preconceived user workflow that I would be violating. It freezes and hangs at weird moments, the UI lacks all kinds of normal Windows niceties like tooltips and hover highlighting, things that are vitally important to click on are rendered as if they are not clickable at all, and in general it looks completely out of place. The message that Windows users get from this kind of thing is that Macs are foreign and hostile and incomprehensible and the idea of spending your whole life in that environment is repellent. Strangely when I use the same software on the Mac it all makes sense - I can't even really explain why.

andrewf 17y ago

Awareness of your own limits, and the likely quality of your work, is a good thing. But this descends into self-flagellation. Waaaah, I suck, you suck, we all suck. We're all the equal-worst programmers EVER. If you're doing research into programming languages, and you're explaining your work, or asking for funding, fine. But coming from practicing programmers, it's a common, trite, pointless and irritating refrain containing zero useful information.

gaius 17y ago

"How do I know, incontrovertibly, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that the world is full of incompetent programmers? Because I'm one of them!" Those who can, code. Those who can't, blog.

alxp 17y ago
Pissing on Jeff's coding ability became passé when he put out the best programming Q&A site out there. You need new material.

geebee 17y ago

I remember that scene from "War of the Roses" where the Danny DeVito character tells the horror story of the Roses to talk a new client out of engaging in an ugly and bitter courtroom battle. I think his line was (paraphrasing here) "when a man who could charge you $250 an hour wants to tell you something for free, you should listen." I often feel that way about software. Remember the stages of a software project? 1) wild enthusiasm 2) profound disillusionment 3) search for the guilty 4) punishment of the innocent 5) rewards and accolades for the non-participants Can't remember exactly where I read that, but software developers have experienced them all, over and over. I don't necessarily try to talk people out of a new development effort. After all, there are clearly times when we need to write software, and some projects are smashing successes. But I kind of feel like that breed of lawyer who tries to get clients to see litigation as a true last resort. I say - is there anything already out there that could solve your problems without a new development effort? How far would a much simpler approach go toward solving your problems - could you live with it? Basically, I want clients to understand just how risky a full blown development effort truly is. Of course, if you need business... well, nothing like an angry divorce to keep the billable hours up, and nothing like a flailing software project funded by deep pockets to keep the cash flow positive....

wglb 17y ago

There is a lot of value in the comments on this article, but I am afraid that the idea that you can usefully hire someone based on the answer to one question is a bit oversimplified. In any project that I have done that spans any length of time, often the first code I wrote doesn't look up to snuff with what I wrote most recently. The later code looks better by virtue of a better feel for the environment and the tools and some obscure abbreviation-finder that seems to be at work in the background. One concern that I would have if you think the worst code that you have seen is stuff you wrote, perhaps you are not reading enough of other people's code. I bet there is a lot of that amongst us all. In the vein of simple questions that help in an interview, particularly for someone who purports to be an expert, is "Tell me five ways that it won't work". An expert ought to have some scars, and have learned from them, no?

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

ggchappell 17y ago

I think this article makes some good points, and I found myself nodding a lot. On the other hand, it (along with some of the HN comments) conflates a couple of unrelated issues: (1) how well software is written, and (2) whether software forces me to do things I don't want to do. One of the parts I nodded along with, was his story of lunging for the computer when the camera software CD was inserted. But this doesn't have anything to do with whether the source of this software was readable, variable names, etc., nor is it related to the competence of the programmers or whether they are aware of their own failings. The issue is that such software is often written with a view toward taking over the way I do things. I want to do things my way. That's the reason for my move from Windows to Linux, and it's why I use Firefox instead of IE when I do use Windows. It's why I avoid Flash when feasible, why I hate most children's educational software, and why I would not even glance at the software that came with a camera. Does this have anything to do with the quality of the code involved in these programs? I don't think so.

ajg1977 17y ago

As usual Atwood manages to destroy a valid perspective (be mindful of your code quality) with unnecessary hyperbole. I wouldn't hire anyone who said their own code was the worst they'd seen recently. Whatever points they may win for perception and awareness are totally overshadowed by their lazy acceptance of the situation. "Which areas of your coding could you most improve on?" - now that is a question worth asking,

cloudhead 17y ago

What you'll end up with is hiring either incompetent programmers who know they're incompetent, or people with no self-esteem. Great. It seems more like either Jeff is incompetent (which he admits to) or self-deprecating, and assumes everyone else is.

miguelpais 17y ago

Clearly the main issue of the post is the answer to the interview question. Although I think it's a very good answer and that to me it would probably mean I would be hiring a guy which is humble, which always views his knowledge has something that still could be better and has a view of his own code has something imperfect, and so he tries very hard to always know more and improve, and that would mean in the end he is just one of the best choices to hire, I think that in most companies that guy would never be hired. Although it sucks, nobody gives any value to humility anymore. They want the confident, "I'm an expert" kind of guy, so giving as answer that the worst code you've seen lately is your own, without any kind of explanation of why you think that (that you view your knowledge has something which as always a long way to go) would probably be a instant KO to the poor humble interviewee.