@[email protected] tbh I could see people who are considered good programmers in one place but not in another place (just prompting to get things done with minimum effort & reserving the effort for something else).
Probably it comes back to interest & care, how much the person is interested in iterating over their solution & architecture + learning things regardless of seniority level to achieve a higher level goal (simpler design for example rather than stopping when it works). Maybe that could be an indication of a good programmer?
@idriss makes sense. The 80-20 rule might apply here. A good programmer knows where to spend their time. I’ve been kicking this around with an old boss and we don’t have any firm ideas. A metric should be quantifiable, but your interest & care gets into self actualization. Maybe a version of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs for software developers?
I am also thinking the word “good” was a bad choice. It’s too subjective and has a negative implication for anyone to the left side of the bell curve. Competent programmers are a thing and I suspect they actually keep most things running smoothly.
I wish I had my old copy of Weinberg’s _The Psychology of Computer Programming_. It’s been decades since I read it so I don’t recall if it addressed this sort of question, but it might suggest something.
@[email protected] tbh I could see people who are considered good programmers in one place but not in another place (just prompting to get things done with minimum effort & reserving the effort for something else). Probably it comes back to interest & care, how much the person is interested in iterating over their solution & architecture + learning things regardless of seniority level to achieve a higher level goal (simpler design for example rather than stopping when it works). Maybe that could be an indication of a good programmer?
@idriss makes sense. The 80-20 rule might apply here. A good programmer knows where to spend their time. I’ve been kicking this around with an old boss and we don’t have any firm ideas. A metric should be quantifiable, but your interest & care gets into self actualization. Maybe a version of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs for software developers?
I am also thinking the word “good” was a bad choice. It’s too subjective and has a negative implication for anyone to the left side of the bell curve. Competent programmers are a thing and I suspect they actually keep most things running smoothly.
I wish I had my old copy of Weinberg’s _The Psychology of Computer Programming_. It’s been decades since I read it so I don’t recall if it addressed this sort of question, but it might suggest something.