3 ms·

Not sure why this is down-voted. I wouldn't necessarily agree with the comment, but it's definitely arguable. I think we should be trying to boost developer p

Not sure why this is down-voted. I wouldn't necessarily agree with the comment, but it's definitely arguable. I think we should be trying to boost developer productivity with better tools and less of the accidental complexity that turns "this should take a few hours" into a 3-week yak shave, even if this means developers need to learn some slightly more difficult tools and techniques at first (the 'tricycle vs. bicycle' principle mentioned here: http://worrydream.com/refs/Vannevar%20Bush%20Symposium%20-%20Closing%20Panel.html http://worrydream.com/refs/Vannevar%20Bush%20Symposium%20-%2...). This might mean that individual projects could be completed by fewer developers, with lower communication overheads and a higher level of professionalism, and this would be a good thing. My suspicion is that this would not lead to there being fewer developers overall, because quantity of good developers is still a constraint on growth - if we had more good developers, more projects would get funded/approved. However, rather than trying to persuade more marginally-skilled people into the industry we might do better by enhancing the productivity of the people we've already got.

ksk 13y ago
Certainly we need better tools, but we also need a better process. I think many people who haven't been exposed to rigorous engineering processes that exist in manufacturing world to build durable products that keep on working year after year or even things like building bridges that have to really hold up to their specifications. As people from the manufacturing world (some of whom are quite unaware of the buggyness of software) attempt to integrate more software into things - the so called 'internet of things' - we're in for a big surprise when most of this stuff ends up breaking. Software people have all too easily have accepted in their mind this 'inevitability' of having to run on the update/patch treadmill to make things work that should never have been shipped in the first place.

ksk 13y ago

Certainly we need better tools, but we also need a better process. I think many people who haven't been exposed to rigorous engineering processes that exist in manufacturing world to build durable products that keep on working year after year or even things like building bridges that have to really hold up to their specifications. As people from the manufacturing world (some of whom are quite unaware of the buggyness of software) attempt to integrate more software into things - the so called 'internet of things' - we're in for a big surprise when most of this stuff ends up breaking. Software people have all too easily have accepted in their mind this 'inevitability' of having to run on the update/patch treadmill to make things work that should never have been shipped in the first place.