Title: More than a label

Author: Bob Schmidt

Date: 11 July 2020 17:30:37 +01:00 or Sat, 11 July 2020 17:30:37 +01:00

Summary: 

Body: 

Sometimes as programmers we get accused of being perfectionists. I say accused, because it’s usually not a term of endearment. It’s often used in a context such as “we don’t have time for perfectionists who want to spend all their time noodling with the code until it’s perfect, and so never actually ship anything.” We’re more likely to hear it in a sentence containing the words ‘over-engineered’ than the words ‘beautifully crafted’.

We’re also more likely to hear it in conjunction with not having time to refactor the code, address the technical debt, automate the build or write tests. These things are so often seen as obstacles to actually delivering software, rather than the things that enable it to be shipped in working order.

This problem, like many others, is not limited to software development. We have to face up to it sometime – software isn’t special! I recently read an article in the music press about a rock band complaining that the label had ruined their record by insisting on releasing it, even though the musicians weren’t happy with the final mix. They wanted a little more time to get it right, but were refused. The record was released to widespread criticism, and the musicians were left having to defend a recording of which they were less than proud.

I have met programmers who are quite happy to ‘noodle’ with code, and never finish it. I’d generally associate them more with the term ‘hacker’ than with ‘perfectionist’, but either way, they’re vastly out-numbered by the number of developers I know who ship working software, sometimes under very challenging circumstances. They usually want the tests to pass, the build to be reliable, the deployment repeatable, and the release itself undramatic. Being accused of being a ‘perfectionist’ for wanting those things isn’t helpful.

Notes: 

More fields may be available via dynamicdata ..