Standards (was: ILE Propoganda)

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
+---