Programming Nowadays...
 

I've been a programmer for quite a while, and I've noticed quite a big change in programming since the days I learned it. Back in the 70's, 80's and even early nineties, programmers had quite a different mindset than we do now. You were taught to reserve resources. To make a program that was not only efficient with what it required, but it had to process at the fastest speed possible. Now, I realize, when something changes, it changes for a reason. Technology has advanced to a point I could never had imagined it would. Recent breakthroughs have astonished me. But when hardware advances, so does software. It seems after technology became more affordable and much more necessary for the average person to own a computer.

So, it seems companies adjusted to that, and had to become more competitive. Nowadays, I'll get new programmers in all the time telling me that they're so worried about getting there project done, and they're finished product will look good and function, but the code they produce looks horrible. Its much slower than it could be, and it will eat up resources faster than a nine-year old will with a bag of candy his dad just bought him. Its sad. But its a reality. It seems now, everyone is so caught up in the capitalist part of programming. No one really cares about making their program fast, or choosing a language that will do that for them. They only care about two things: time and money. What has happen to programming? Am I the only one with the old mindset? We're so bent on getting paid, we really could care less about what we produce, as long as it satisfies the boss.

The world now... It just sickens me to realize the truth. Was I blinded as a young boy? Has it always been like this? Or are we making a turn down the wrong path? Anyways, I think its time we stepped up, rolled our sleeves up and stop wining about how much work it will be to save a few resources. We should just start practicing it. I do it all the time. We need to teach these newbies to stop being so damned lazy and really finish a project. If we make just a few small changes, we can get so much more done.

Sometimes it is cheaper to buy more memory and hard drive space than it is to make a program more efficient. I have worked with companies in the past who have given me that as an aswer to some of the suggestions I have produced when tackling project; this has nothing to do with laziness, and personally I can not disagree with that mindset in a business environment. Why would you spend more money to make something conceptually more attractive when it will work just as well?

I am not disagreeing entirely with what you are saying, I have seen some really lazy practices which has lead to half-functioning code, but usually when this happens it is not strictly a question of efficiency, things are actually broken.

I'm not a neophyte, either. I've walked that walk. Just remember this: the programmer is one of the resources. You don't want to pay a kilobuck for one resource to save a buck on another. Lack of quality does cost, of course, so be sure to add that in. Just ugly pains one, but doesn't really count.

I'm a young'n, but I care about code quality for a number of reasons.

- Reusability
- Readability
- Usability
- Artistic Value

I have to apply those (and others, I'm sure) at different times.

If the boss wants a utility, I usually don't comment, but I'll make my var/func names a little more contextualized. I'll also make sure that it's easy enough to reuse (tho, rarely modular,) and that it runs quickly enough to handle whatever the average data set size will be.

If it's something for the outside world to use (search, CMS, etc.,) it'll be fast, efficient, clean, commented, documented AND modular.

Artistic value only comes in when I write code on my own time, and is mainly to get me thinking about different ways of doing things.

I understand what you see and why you're concerned, Baphomet. I think it's the whole world. As long as time is money, the greedy will always demand that everything be done yesterday. Sad, but that's the way it is.

I hate that mindset because when you sacrifice quality, you maim your future. Cheap food fast = malnutrition. Cheap machinery fast = more frequent breakdowns. Cheap pharmaceuticals fast = more uncaught long-term side-effects. Cheap furniture = wears out quicker. All that = more money and ill-effects in the long run.

If people would slow down and look at what they're doing, and how that might affect the future, they might change their style a bit. But I don't see that happening until some catastrophe occurs.

That's my two cents, anyways.

P.S. I don't think it's always been this bad on this scale, but I do believe there have always been humans with that mindset.

P.P.S. Check out the new "Baby Boomers" documentary on PBS some time. They suggest the responsibility for the current state of the world rest on the shoulders of that generation. I'm inclined to agree since the elder are thinned out in the workforce, and the younger have yet to assume control.

I applude you, Dr. P. The market would be better if we had more programmers that shared our mindset.

Now, I realize what you the rest of you have been saying. Slower && More Efficiency ==More Cost. And that's not true. We need to teach these new programmers the old mindset. That's my argument. We need more people like Dr. P. We need younger programmers who share that old mindset. And it doesn't necessarily mean that we need to slow down. I can produce code at least 10 times faster and more efficient than these corperate bobble heads in the same amount of time. It is major case of "I don't want to do it because it will take too much time to learn". These people have plenty of time. They are just plain lazy and greedy.

But while they continue to be rewarded for their attitudes then they have no reason to change :( .

Precisely. We need a company out there that encompases both mindsets. A company that remains competitive and still makes the most efficient product possible. We need to start re-arranging our priorities. Make every programmer again embrace those ideals, so we can really start moving forward. Actually if we actually start teachin this to newer programmers, we could move a lot faster in the future. It doesn't mean at all we have to slow down. You can more done in the same amount of time if you just work at it.

Its important to high quality code, that doesn't not mean it will be as fast as possible upon first writing. That means it will be easy to understand, maintain and extend. I was surprised but in Code Complete 2, the author mentions goes through the different processes used in businesses to increase software quality. Although the practice required to produce high quality code are labor intensive they actually make it cheaper to produce a product because its makes it easy to maintain, debug, test, and extend. So it saves you time in future, and during production.

So once you got you high quality piece of code, it will be relatively easy to optimize the bottleneck portions without wasting time making the for loop that runs for 0.1% the programs run time 10 times faster. So its not about speed so much as lots of programmers who need better training are being unleashed upon unsuspecting code bases.

As I was going through college most of my professors focused on conserving resources while increasing function and speed. Although, there were those professors / instructors who didn't care what it looked like, as long as it was done on time and displayed the expected result.

The reality is, hardware is becoming so fast and inexpensive in comparison to the earlier decades... so now you get more "bang for the buck" and memory cines a "dime a dozen"... so often times companies rather get additional hardware as opposed to paying a programming staff to make the code more effiencient. Perhaps they view it as the lesser of two evils.

I'm certain those in the embedded systems area do not share the mindset of the "lazy programmers" because there are still physical constraints and a defined environment.

However, two of my past employers were quick to add additional nodes, more memory, or buy larger mainframes, etc... just to have a slight increase in performance. Both of which were allocated annual IT budgets. If the funds were not completely used at the end of the fiscal year, the amount allocated to them the following year would be reduced... so as a result, you have these companies buying extra, often times unused, equipment just to use excess funds, so their budgets do no not get redefined during the start of the next fiscal year. Normally, this is when lazy programmers get bigger monitors, newer chairs, and a free supply of mountain dew. :)

I see what you mean man! Here's my most recent experience:

Last project I had was to create a website that ran on a CD. When the project was announced, we had a month to design the site. I pulled out a pencil and paper, then sketched a couple of designs. After a few sketches, they finally agreed to a design. I opened up my programmer's notepad and started coding the HTML page and style sheet. After about a few hours, they asked me how's the site going and I told them I said I was stilling writing up the styling sheet.

Our Technology Specialist looked at me and said 'MS Publisher created websites too.' I said yeah, ever looked at the code and how slow it runs? Well, a week later I ended up making the website in Publisher. I was a little upset but thats what they wanted. Something fast and wanted it yesterday. Well, a week after. The rest of the work on the website was just errors in the style and wrong fonts appears and etc.

Now that I am talking about it. I would have taken me a little longer to create a nice style sheet and a good looking Web 2.0 site but apparently time is money! *ugh*

All my web programming in done in this application developed by Oracle called Application Express. It creates a web application in no time, maybe a few hours if that. Limited styles but my job uses no other tool but Application Express. I asked one of the guys one time if they ever thought about using C# or Java. He told me that there is a lot of coding just to get some simple results and the process of learning those language would take even longer. I just shut up and went back to my workstation. IT *sigh*.

I want to do Software Development business and program the right way. Seems like what people teach in school doesn't apply to businesses.