digg

"If programmers liked to code, we’d all be writing in machine language to this day."

Ridiculous. The two go hand in hand. If you're a programmer that doesn't like to program then you're not a programmer. I will agree with the 'someone elses code' thing though. Most often, you need to understand the scope of what ALL the code does, not just this little thing that needs to be fixed. Even if the foreign code is well written, it often requires considerable study first.

Read the article after that paragraph before blowing your top off Cappy

"If programmers liked to code, they wouldn’t value a language by its libraries. If programmers liked to code, every last one of us would be overjoyed to write our own HTTP client.

Instead, programmers get ***** when they have to write code. “I just want to update this field in this file, why do I have to write an XML parser?” They will abandon languages/platforms wholesale that lack the features they need (either built-in or as libraries)."

I for one think he got it spot on .

Reading it further on only makes me empathise with the author. With statements like


"Programmers write code to learn."


He's pretty much writing my life story right there. I dont know about you. But most programmers I know and I have been in situations we've felt this way. But hey if that makes us non-programmers in your books, lets just agree to disagree

But seriously though , Please read the entire article. Jumping the gun might work when diggers dont bother to read the articles and just digg you up depending on how vehement you sound in making your point, as well as how close to the first post you are. But when it comes to topics like programming rest assured theres a higher chance that there might just be more people clicking on the outbound link

so... Do coders like to program?

Damn...maybe I should switch back to CompSci major, i hated to code, so I dropped it.

I rather tend to agree with the idea that programmers don't like to re-code. In the projects I have led I try to avoid "reinventing the wheel" as much as possible, mostly because it is a tedious waste of time.

It seems to me Programmers don't like to waste time is a more accurate statement.

I definitely love problem solving but hate to do more than I have to. Coding is a means to an end. Basically it boils down to this for me: if I think I can do better, I'll code it from scratch (even if assembly is involved). If I think it's a well-solved problem, I'll use what's already available.

Of course, I'm an electrical engineer (computer engineer specifcally) who codes, rather than a computer scientist, so maybe my opinion doesn't count.

Maxim

it's not that we don't like to code

it's that we don't want to have to be code monkeys. leave those boring, repetitive portions that are mostly typing exercises to the jr developers. i want to write the fun stuff, the stuff that's truly difficult and original. that's the *****.

Jeez, how his second name is pronounced?

clearly, lame-ass bloggers like to argue though.

This guy obviously hasn't played with Ruby.

Cleaner doesnt like to clean,
Killer doesnt like to kill,
it's ***** obvious - nobody likes to WORK! :))

I disagree. I simply like to code. I code things all the time and then delete them, just because I enjoy typing up code. I have written HTTP servers just for the fun of it. I like problem solving too, but in the end I just like to code.

I agree, I hate typing out code. Well it wasn't so bad in the beginning but now it's just like UGH, esp SQL queries. BUT I love when I finish a project, figure out a better solution.

from the Article:

"Summing up: programmers don’t like to code, we like to solve problems. Coding is not problem solving, but software problem solving usually involves some coding. Even when we talk about rewriting something, the objective is not to code, it’s usually to get a better understanding of the problem for solving in the best possible manner."

I'm a programmer. I like the problem solving and architecting part of being a programmer, but I don't actually like writing code. I like writing code for myself, I guess, but when I do it for others, I've just taken a really great skill and turned it into nothing more than what a laborer does on a construction site; grunt work.

Meh, I claim total inaccuracy from personal experience. I love to code, I love to use code to solve problems. That's what I do for a living and I'm happy.

We, as programmers, LOVE to code. No, this does not mean "reinventing the wheel" - we have libraries for a reason. However, ask any good programmer, and you'll immediately see the passion and feeling of success that coding brings. Working on new, innovative solutions makes the job exciting (even if you're working off of somebody else's code, you're still programming).

Buried as inaccurate.

Nobody writes like me and nobody will ever write like me. So there :p
Close to 30 years of writing software for me... damn I'm getting old.

Superbowl in 90 minutes. GO COLTS!!!

Here's the whole text:

Andrew Leonard interviewing Scott Rosenberg:

And programmers, as I quote Larry Constantine in my book, programmers are programmers because they like to code — given a choice between learning someone else’s code and just sitting down and writing their own, they will always do the latter.

cough

Wow. If Rosenberg isn’t butchering Constantine’s quote, it lends credence that even software’s great practitioners lack the ability to introspect and cogently report on their own profession. No wonder we’re all confused.

Rosenberg is wrong. Programmers don’t like coding, they like problem solving.

If programmers liked to code, we’d all be writing in machine language to this day. You can write that stuff all day and get precious little of the real problem solved.

If programmers liked to code, they wouldn’t value a language by its libraries. If programmers liked to code, every last one of us would be overjoyed to write our own HTTP client.

Instead, programmers get ***** when they have to write code. “I just want to update this field in this file, why do I have to write an XML parser?” They will abandon languages/platforms wholesale that lack the features they need (either built-in or as libraries).

From an outsider’s vantage, I can see why they’d think we like coding. We solve problems by coding, and we’re all happy and enthused while typing away or talking code. But they’re confusing the action and the intention. It’s not pulling the trigger that makes me happy, it’s hitting the target. The action approaches incidental.

Another reason outsiders think we like to code is that we’re always talking about rewriting things. Even coders themselves fall into the delusion we rewrite because it’s “more fun than reading other people’s code”.

While there are times we want to ground-up rewrite due to architectural considerations (new runtime, new language, major new functionality) in my experience the common case for wanting to rewrite is to understand.

Spolsky gets it right that “It’s harder to read code than to write it”, but unfortunately reaches for the tired “people (programmers) are stupid/lazy/undiciplined” argument as an explanation. (I chafe in principle against this class of argument since it almost always obscures deeper underlying factors.)

He grazes the desire-to-understand intent behind rewriting by trotting out the two-page function example with the hypothetical programmer’s “I don’t know what half of these API calls are for” quotation, but leaves it to die in the snow for his shinier superficial negative explanation.

Programmers desire to rewrite because they know that after starting with a clean sheet of paper and building it all again, at the end they’ll understand the whole. Programmers write code to learn. Software has this double-edged sword where you can’t just wave your hands instead of implementing a particular function. It all has to be crystal. Programmers know this. They know when they’re done, they’ll have a complete understanding. It’s a noble desire.

Bad source bases irritate programmers because it shakes their foundation of understanding necessary to solve the problem. I reject the explanation that programmers capriciously want to rewrite code for the fun of it.

The programmers-write-code-to-learn idea is behind Brooks’ “build one to throw one away”. Brooks’ idea was seminal but raw, today we’ve nuanced it down to spikes and iterative development.

The second and final deep reason behind the desire to rewrite is elegance. Like rewrite-to-understand, this reason is also founded in understanding. Once you understand a problem and have its solution, it’s only natural to want to cleave off the unnecessary, trimming the solution to its stark and obvious. Throwing a bone to Spolsky, I’ll concede rewriting-for-elegence is a slippery slope toward code narcissism.

Summing up: programmers don’t like to code, we like to solve problems. Coding is not problem solving, but software problem solving usually involves some coding. Even when we talk about rewriting something, the objective is not to code, it’s usually to get a better understanding of the problem for solving in the best possible manner.

A much better argument is that since programmers like problem solving, they invent problems were there aren’t any. But that’s another post.

I can see what the guy is saying. I'm a Java guy, and the first thing I do before write something that seems somewhat generic is check the Jakarta commons libraries to see if somebody else has already written it. I'd much rather use open-source, well tested code as opposed to my own. In my mind it's much cooler to get that final functionality working as opposed to, for example, writing the method to sort a set of names Alphabetically by last name, or something.

I agree with the article. I'll add that I've found over the years that my apparent laziness has increased. At one time I was happy writing reams of C code bristling with mallocs and such. Upon spending time with C++ I couldn't go back to C for the things I found enjoyable about C now seemed to be overwhelmed by tedium. Same thing happened when moving to Java after C++, where C++ once seemed remarkable, it now seemed to be overrun by weeds. Learning Ruby did the same thing to the way I experience Java, which I now find harder to enjoy.

Not only do I prefer to avoid writing code unless I have to, I also have a hard time going back to languages and techniques that once seemed so normal. Less code can also be found by moving away from languages that demand of you too much needless syntax, too much manual housekeeping, to much role-playing the machine instead of focusing on the problem. Once you've successfully done more with less, it's hard to go back.

I do.
Back to code now :)

This is silly I personally would much rather write my own code and know how it works than try to understand the way someone else things.

"If programmers liked to code, they wouldn’t value a language by its libraries. If programmers liked to code, every last one of us would be overjoyed to write our own HTTP client."

Programmers like to code. That doesn't mean they don't have preferences regarding what they want to code and what they'd rather have built into a library.

"Instead, programmers get ***** when they have to write code. “I just want to update this field in this file, why do I have to write an XML parser?” They will abandon languages/platforms wholesale that lack the features they need (either built-in or as libraries)."

A real programmer doesn't "just want to update this field in this file". Such mundane tasks are an insult to his intelligence. It may have to be done to complete a job, but it doesn't show the programmers true worth. A programmer doesn't want to write an XML parser unless he can write a better XML parser, in which case the opportunity to rise to the challenge is most appreciated.

This is why I'm not a very good programmer. I can use built in libs just fine but when it comes to writing large chunks of original code I get a bit overwhelmed and discouraged and eventually quit. I have a ton of respect and admiration for programmers who can sit down and crank out line after line of original code. I envy you guys.

Do these overly simplistic polar generalizations have any practical upshot one way or another? Seems like a waste of time to argue between two meaningless choices.

what's worse is studying code... right now I need to learn assembler for an IBM processor. It's only the 3rd week of school and it's already kicking my rear.

I would love to learn assembler

This just in! People DON'T like to work! I repeat, DON'T like to work!!!! More breaking news to follow, please stay tuned.

Cached copy: http://rentzsch.com.nyud.net:8080/notes/programmersDontLikeToCode

" [...] in my experience the common case for wanting to rewrite is to understand."

SO true... and in general I think the blogger got it right.

I am a programmer, which means I solve problems..

Programming has NOTHING to do with computers, alot to do with language, and everything to do with problem solving.

It is incidental that computers are fantastic tools for problem solving.
And more importantly: Computers themselves GENERATE so many problems, you need people to solve alot of computer related problems.

Ah! but what about the Da Vinci code? Howdya like them Apples?

I love to make programs. I just don't like the writing part.

blogger quotes something out of context, takes it the wrong way and writes a lame blog post.

lame.

We code because we like to code. We use libraries to save time coding or because we don't know how to do X ourselves.

The only "programmers" that I've ever met who didn't like to code were the incompetent sods who were only in it for the money. They usually wind up dying as middle managers. Good programmers love writing code; it's the debugging and regression testing that we don't like, but accept as a necessary evil for delivering good product. Anyone who says that they "don't like to code" has no business being a programmer.

I'm a .Net developer and I enjoy writing code.

http://dailybeauty.com

Personally, I love to code. It's more like building a toy to me than problem solving. I realize that libraries are efficient. But I kind of miss the old days when we used to write everything from scratch. A lot of programming these days seems like gluing a bunch of other people's code together. I know we can't go back, but I do miss it.

Whether a person likes to code or not, I'll argue that the current methods for coding are horribly inefficient.

Programming needs to go 3D. Coding is logic and we as human beings interact with our world through all our senses. Virtually every problem can be represented and solved using a visual model. Maybe if the IDE world would get it's act together a produce something of this caliber then it would be very obvious what code does and the "need" to write your own wouldn't be so great.

Imagine building a system and seeing it represented in 3D space. Imagine orbiting around, viewing your model from different angles, analyzing work flows, making sense of a system almost immediately. Imagine watching threads execute. Imagine literally seeing where memory is leaking. Imagine being able to zoom out and orbit around your system, and then if you need, zoom in to analyze operations up close, write a line of code if you desire. Imagine relaxing backdrops with environmental reactions to your interaction. The possibilities are endless.

With the availability of graphical horsepower being as it is, there is so much opportunity to improve programming. It's a logical evolution that's way overdue.

I agree with this because I code when I want something that does not exist exactly the way I want it, so I end up doing it myself.

I hate problem solving, typing, trying to be efficient, yet logical, yet expandable, yet tidy way, and the satisfaction comes entirely from when its finished and it works in the way I planned.

I long for the day when a brain interface allows you to just think your application instead :)

I suffer from a medium case of Obsessive/Compulsive Disorder. I actually like to code. As long as I'm coding, my anxiety is at a minimum.

Sorry, dude.

This is also a common remark of book writers.

Crichton and DeMille have said in interviews that they HATE to sit down and write a book.

They like the research, outlining the book's flow, and the end product of holding their novel
in their hands, but they hate the actual mechanics of writing the book.

It is very true that programmers are problem solvers. But as pointed out many times already, programmers like to code. Why? Because programming is fun. Fields of study are endless, you always need to improve and you learn everyday.
The article raises good points, but as the author stated, he has an outsider point of view. Developers can reason very differently.

The FA misses the point on many levels. But that's OK.

I love coding. Not much can beat a fridge full of coke and food, and sitting coding for hours!