
It's fundamental: You are a programmer if you... - iamelgringo
http://weblog.raganwald.com/2008/01/its-fundamental-you-are-programmer-if.html
======
gensym
In other words, debates about what makes one a good programmer are interesting
and helpful. Questions about our responsibilities to the industry and society
as a whole are worth discussing. Discussions of the meaning and value of a
university degree and universities' responsibilities can be valuable, even if
they're inflammatory.

However, arguments about taxonomy are boring, a waste of time, and usually
more rooted in snobbery than any desire to learn or teach about our chosen
field, so let's all agree on this definition so we can go back to the more
interesting discussions.

~~~
raganwald
> usually more rooted in snobbery than any desire to learn or teach about our
> chosen field

I defy anyone to start teaching programming by opening with the lines "You may
think you're a programmer, but you aren't." It will probably go as far as
writing a blog post that says "you may think you belong to an exclusive club,
but you don't."

------
dgabriel
Continuing the artist analogy, you are a poet if you write something everyone
agrees is a poem. It doesn't mean you're automatically the poet laureate of
_anything_ , or even a not-terrible poet, but you have written a poem, and you
can probably write more poems, therefore you are a poet.

Similarly, you are a programmer if you can write computer programs. Even if
the programs suck and you're a mindless hack, and nobody in their right mind
would hire you.

------
cduan
Maybe we've got a false dichotomy on our hands? Rather than a binary
programmer-not, we should think of a spectrum of programming ability.

It's just a label after all; what really counts isn't what I call you, but
what you can do.

~~~
raganwald
This is the point I was trying to make: that there are programmers who would
be _better_ if they applied the fundamentals. I though the foot-painting
analogy would make that clear.

But judging by the response, everyone thought I was presenting a dichotomy,
which proves that although I am a writer of sorts, I am not a _good_ writer.

~~~
gills
I liked your post. It reminded me of "anyone can cook" in the movie
Ratatouille.

------
tjr
Hmmm. I think it's more about, do you do it habitually, consistently, etc.

If I diagnosed myself with a cold, I wouldn't call myself a doctor. If I went
around diagnosing other people with colds, or opened up an office where people
could trundle in and let me diagnose them with a cold, then yes, I might
consider myself a doctor... though a pathetic one.

I started programming when I was 12. If I had just written a few programs at
that time, and then stopped, and never did it again, then I don't think it
would be fair to call myself a programmer. Since I have continued to write
programs, and expect to do so for the foreseeable future, then -- even if I
don't do it as well as you do -- I believe I am a programmer.

------
mynameishere
You are a music composer if you...whistle aimlessly.

~~~
run4yourlives
Well, if you whistle a tune you wrote, I suppose you are.

~~~
mynameishere
As I said, aimlessly.

~~~
run4yourlives
You also said compose. :-)

------
Hexstream
This post is inane at best, harmful at worst.

It sounds like: "You know, mediocrity is not so bad."

~~~
run4yourlives
As opposed to the "You should program like this" posts?

It makes perfect sense: Hackers and Painters, after all; you're an artist if
you paint, even if the portrait sucks.

~~~
jraines
Not necessarily, but you _are_ a painter.

~~~
noahlt
Likewise, you can be a programmer without necessarily being a hacker.

------
edw519
for (i=0;i<ManyTimes;i++) { div1.innerHTML += 'For the '+i+'th time, me
<I>still</I> is the Chief Programmer of the USA<BR>' }

If it runs, it must be true.

