September 7, 2010
Coding 'Til You Drop Gets The Thumbs-DownI'm horrifically busy at the moment, which makes a change. But I just couldn't let this one go.
I tweeted this morning my career ambition. I would like to remain a programmer for the rest of my career. And I would like that to be seen as a good thing, and not a failure on my part to progress into management.
Programming is the most skilled job in IT. And programmers are the most skilled people. I would like to get better at it, and end my career on a programming high.
a. I enjoy it, and
b. Programming is kind of useful on software projects. The world needs working code.
Indeed, the world's appetite for working code grows ever more voracious. In the 30+ years since the first microcontroller was put in a car engine, we now have an average of 100 million lines of code in your luxury family saloon. I'm surrounded by devices that host millions of lines of code. My life, and probably yours, functions on working code every day. This is the information age, after all.
So if I enjoy programming, and the world needs programs that are useful, usable, reliable, maintainable, secure etc etc, then surely we have a marriage made in heaven.
And if I want to go on coding and not climb the career ladder into ever-more-lofty management positions, who could begrudge me that?
Well, someone could, it seems.
Bob Marshall (@flowchainsensei) retweeted it with a "-1" - basically, a thumbs down. He then tweeted:
"A focus on coding is self-indulgent and antithetical to the #lean ideas of value and flow, as well as to the #agile manifesto and principles"
Wow. I don't think Agile veterans like Uncle Bob Martin, Kent Beck, Ron Jeffries, Ward Cunningham, Steve Freeman, Nat Pryce, Ivan Moore, Joshua Kerievsky, Martin Fowler (and some bloke called Jason Gorman) got that memo. Somebody better tell them: if you want to be Agile, you need to stop coding beyond a certain age.
Now you'll have to pardon my French, but I couldn't give a flying fuck if I'm being "Lean", or frankly if I'm being "Agile", for that matter. I create working software. It is the software the customer asks for. Demonstrably so, as evidence by their acceptance tests - which are also expressed as code, because they need to be executable. So I have to deliver those, as well.
Now maybe in 2035 we'll all be creating software using pure thought channeled through a selection of genetically-modified winter vegetables, but that process will still be called "programming" and I want to be still doing it, and - if I pray to the coding pixies hard enough - maybe I'll be doing it better.
It's all very well saying "a focus on coding is self-indulgent", but no matter how unselfishly you manage your orchestra, you'll still need musicians who can "self-indulgently" make pleasing noises come out of their instruments using the enormous battery of skills they've built up over many years of dedicated practice. And nobody points at the pianist, or the lead violin or lead soprano and says "shouldn't you be a conductor by now?"
Nor do they accuse musicians of being "self-indulgent" in their ambition to become better musicians and not to persue a glittering management career at some record label or in the Arts Council.
If you love to code, and you're good at it, and if the world needs more and more working software, software of increasing sophistication and complexity, software that we come ever more to rely on in our daily lives, isn't it more selfish and self-indulgent to walk away from that calling?
Some people really need to go away and sit in a darkened room (or atop a distant mountain) and consider the realism of managing working software into existence. When the day comes when someone can demonstrate the creation of valuable software without programming (including "programming in pictures", before you MDA fans get too excited), then I'll hang up my IDE.
Posted 1 day, 20 hours ago on September 7, 2010