Comments on: Holding a Program in One’s Head http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/08/holding-a-program-in-ones-head/ Little boxes made of words, by Jens Alfke Sun, 14 Mar 2010 11:32:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Jens Alfke http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/08/holding-a-program-in-ones-head/comment-page-1/#comment-2104 Jens Alfke Sun, 24 Feb 2008 22:46:52 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/08/holding-a-program-in-ones-head/#comment-2104 filipp — I agree about programming being like sketching, a process of incremental refinement. But the difference is that the sketch is much bigger than you can see at once, so you have to have a good mental model of it as a whole. filipp — I agree about programming being like sketching, a process of incremental refinement. But the difference is that the sketch is much bigger than you can see at once, so you have to have a good mental model of it as a whole.

]]> By: filipp http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/08/holding-a-program-in-ones-head/comment-page-1/#comment-2103 filipp Sun, 24 Feb 2008 21:36:12 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/08/holding-a-program-in-ones-head/#comment-2103 Maybe I'm getting this all wrong, but I've always liked the idea of sketching about programming. That, just as a musician working on a piece, perfecting it with every pass, programs are never "completely in your head", but rather it's a series of actions that then lead to the full thing. IIRC, it was Paul Graham himself who articulated this idea in Hackers & Painters and this particular statement seems to contradict it. :/ Maybe I’m getting this all wrong, but I’ve always liked the idea of sketching about programming. That, just as a musician working on a piece, perfecting it with every pass, programs are never “completely in your head”, but rather it’s a series of actions that then lead to the full thing.

IIRC, it was Paul Graham himself who articulated this idea in Hackers & Painters and this particular statement seems to contradict it. :/

]]> By: russell Holt http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/08/holding-a-program-in-ones-head/comment-page-1/#comment-2102 russell Holt Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:31:00 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/08/holding-a-program-in-ones-head/#comment-2102 It is true - programmers need that mental model, and the problem is that six months from now, you've forgotten it and your code looks like it was written by somebody else. I think what's far more important than the code alone is that mental model - so the path forward in software development is to somehow capture or represent it. In a large, complex, evolving software system, much of what we are doing is not code - its bugs and schedules and documentation and stuff - is actually done with computer tools already. Code doesn't exist in isolation and the fact that this bit of code has a known but or is slow is important and can easily be represented in such a system. When you're looking at a specific portion of code, for instance, it should be clear that there is a known bug. Or the fact that it is slow, or has had some discussion threads about it. I'm sure we can connect all this stuff up in a way that creates a larger context for much of the little independent pieces. while it can never be a substitute for understanding a system, I think it would help create that mental model a whole lot faster. It is true - programmers need that mental model, and the problem is that six months from now, you’ve forgotten it and your code looks like it was written by somebody else. I think what’s far more important than the code alone is that mental model - so the path forward in software development is to somehow capture or represent it. In a large, complex, evolving software system, much of what we are doing is not code - its bugs and schedules and documentation and stuff - is actually done with computer tools already. Code doesn’t exist in isolation and the fact that this bit of code has a known but or is slow is important and can easily be represented in such a system. When you’re looking at a specific portion of code, for instance, it should be clear that there is a known bug. Or the fact that it is slow, or has had some discussion threads about it. I’m sure we can connect all this stuff up in a way that creates a larger context for much of the little independent pieces. while it can never be a substitute for understanding a system, I think it would help create that mental model a whole lot faster.

]]> By: Donald http://jens.mooseyard.com/2007/08/holding-a-program-in-ones-head/comment-page-1/#comment-2101 Donald Wed, 03 Oct 2007 19:48:08 +0000 http://mooseyard.com/Jens/2007/08/holding-a-program-in-ones-head/#comment-2101 Jens, I think what you describe is a real problem. I tend to think of this as programmer personality types. This isn't new, but I like to break these personality types into three basic forms: wild eyed dreamer, get on the bus, and get this puppy out the door. There are other types (one of my favs is the I just want hard debugging problems to solve) but these are the ones I think companies need to be aware of... You need the wild eyed dreamers to come up with the cool next gen ideas and to get the up to proof of concept stage (or just past). You need the get on the bus types to take the wild eyed dreamers work and make it a commercial product. The get this puppy out the door type is the finisher of the bunch... Problem is, who does the hiring? Most companies/teams hire in their own image. That means many teams/companies are top heavy with one of the three personalities... Guess what that means to the bottom line... I could go in, as I've experienced this problem repeatedly in my career. But I won't. Donald Jens, I think what you describe is a real problem. I tend to think of this as programmer personality types. This isn’t new, but I like to break these personality types into three basic forms: wild eyed dreamer, get on the bus, and get this puppy out the door. There are other types (one of my favs is the I just want hard debugging problems to solve) but these are the ones I think companies need to be aware of… You need the wild eyed dreamers to come up with the cool next gen ideas and to get the up to proof of concept stage (or just past). You need the get on the bus types to take the wild eyed dreamers work and make it a commercial product. The get this puppy out the door type is the finisher of the bunch… Problem is, who does the hiring? Most companies/teams hire in their own image. That means many teams/companies are top heavy with one of the three personalities… Guess what that means to the bottom line…

I could go in, as I’ve experienced this problem repeatedly in my career. But I won’t.

Donald

]]>