>>Because when it's done right, coding is 80% "architecting" stuff. If there is more than a tiny amount of menial work involved in programming then you are gene

>>Because when it's done right, coding is 80% "architecting" stuff. If there is more than a tiny amount of menial work involved in programming then you are generally doing something very wrong. I both agree and disagree with this, or it may be that the statement is vague (or that I just don't understand it). I have seen horrible "analysis paralysis" at most of the big financial institution where I have worked - especially the ones with a separate "architect" job. Hundreds of UML diagrams that were worse than none. For myself, I actually understand problems better by coding them. I can't always say exactly how something will work until I do it. Once I have general idea defined, I just start coding it! This is not to say that I sometimes don't put pencil to paper to help me think it through, but I would say I spend far, far more time coding than thinking. In fact, for me, coding is thinking. Yes, there is rewriting and throwing away and revising and tightening that inevitably happens. I work more like a writer, I suppose. This may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it's how I work. There is a balance to these things and it's up to everyone to figure out where they fall.