Posts

Showing posts with the label craftsmen

Simple v. Complicated

I borrowed this from Dictionary.com, so I kept the first word as a link to the original. I hope that's okay with them. sim·ple      [ sim -p uh l ]     Show IPA   adjective,   sim·pler, sim·plest,   noun adjective 1. easy   to   understand,   deal   with,   use,   etc.:   a   simple   matter; simple   tools. 2. not   elaborate   or   artificial;   plain:   a   simple   style. 3. not   ornate   or   luxurious;   unadorned:   a   simple   gown. 4. unaffected;   unassuming;   modest:   a   simple   manner. 5. not   complicated:   a   simple   design. My hot words are "simple" and "complex." Most people who say "simple" don't mean simple. They mean "easy", with an implied "to think of" or "to type in" or "to do without researching."  Easy is a virtue...

Linear and Radial Progress: Take The Next Step

Today we didn't make a lot of linear progress I think of quality in two ways.  One is the product quality that users perceive, and the other is the habitability of the code itself. One says whether the function points and UX are well-selected, and the other says whether it is worth your time to try to work in the code.  One can have crap code that seems great externally, and one can have beautiful code that doesn't do anything a user is interested in doing (the popularly presented dichotomy). Likewise one could have poor functionality written poorly, or great functionality written well.  Those who consider themselves professionals in software craft will desire great functionally written well. I often get to work in code that started out as good functionality badly written. I get to work on the teams that clean up the mess and make the system more useful, scalable, and performant. As we work, the code gathers external quality. It becomes increasingly virtuous .  S...