|
Chris Rehm wrote >I think the biggest problem is programmer's ego. >The thing is, standards always involve compromise. Firstly, I completely agree with the tenor of your note! I would like to suggest that standards don't necessarily involve a compromise. Read on... >But, there will always be programmers who feel >that doing things the other way is the "better" of the two. >Since they are no doubt "smarter" than the people who >had to make the decisions in the first place, >they violate the standard. "Compromise" to these folks means "I lose." Setting standards doesn't have to be seen as a zero-sum game, however. >Obviously this really proves they aren't as bright >as they thought, since they are taking actions >which cause the most harm overall, but their >ego isn't going to allow that to sink in. I'm going to paste this (with attribution) into every standards document I ever work on from now on! >The thing is, programming using standards is an act >of teamwork to allow the whole shop work together >more effectively. For programmers to do that, they >need to be able to set their ego aside. I've tried taking Steve McConnell's view of standards: They're there to free me up from having to make the multitude of small decisions over and over. For instance, if we say "no right side comments," then I never have to decide how to properly abbreviate my right side comment. If we say "all related assignments should happen together and be aligned at the equal sign," then I don't need to decide how (if?) to align my code. The point is that we all make thousands of decisions when working in code, from how to name things, how to size them, how to implement, document and retire them. The more time I get to apply my brainpower to the Big Picture, the better the whole thing will turn out. If I bog myself down making relatively meaningless decisions ("CustNumb is better than CustNo") then how much time is leftover for the strategic decisions? >Really, we all program with standards. Just the >egotistical among us only accept our own standards >as valid. Which ties directly back to your statement that they're not as bright as they think. Of course, neither am I, which is why I treasure ideas from people from this list so much! Not every one applies to my situation, but my situation could change tomorrow, and being exposed to clear thinking is thankfully contagious. Buck Calabro Commsoft; Albany, NY Visit the Midrange archives and FAQ at http://www.midrange.com "...the humourous man shall end his part in peace..." -- Hamlet Act II, scene ii +--- | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.