!Re: Nuke Redmond!

From: Mike Cheponis <mac_at_Wireless.Com>
Date: Sat Apr 8 13:04:14 2000

On Sat, 8 Apr 2000, Sean 'Captain Napalm' Conner wrote:
>...

> Not to be outdone, it was an American Professor who, when asked what
> to do if you don't know how to handle an error, was to simply not
> check for the error.

Clearly, this American Professor writes code for Linux! ;-)


> Then there's the code I've had to work with. Simple unmaintainable
> messes. It's gotten to the point where I don't want to even be
> considered in the same profession as these people.
>
> So, the sample size might be too small. But a friend of mine works
> with European programmers (he's American), along with American
> programmers. The Americans just can't program period (there are a
> few exceptions), while the Europeans can, but they love (and he's
> quoted them on this) making it complex, for whatever reason (and
> again, there are a few exceptions).

This observation completely agrees with mine. I would make the further claim
that American programmers who make complex code do not understand
software engineering, either (with a few exceptions).

The major reason for this is that most people are not suited to be
software engineers. There are fewer people suited than there are
opportunities for software engineers. Ergo: Problem.

When computers were young, mathematicians tended to program them. They
tended to be relatively careful programmers.

Yet, the general level of software engineering up through the, say,
early 80s was not all that great. (Take a look at some of that old code,
and I think you'll find that the standards today have risen as to what
we consider to be "good code" - and most of that old stuff doesn't rise
to those levels.)

So, compounded with needing more software engineers, the level of
acceptable quality has risen. Therefore, today, your average piece of
software is garbage (with exceptions, of course!).


-mac
Received on Sat Apr 08 2000 - 13:04:14 BST