You’ve probably heard about the Pragmatic Programmers — Hunt and Thomas — and their famous book: The Pragmatic Programmer: From Journeyman to Master (I’m currently reading it). I really recommend this book — I’ll do a formal review later, after finishing it. Anyway, in that book, they have quite a few really good — pragmatic — tips. I thought it would be nice to have those tips summarized. Sure enough, I found a summary today on CodingHorror.com. You will appreciate this reference more after you read the book.
This page summarizes the tips and checklists found in The Pragmatic Programmer.
For more information about The Pragmatic Programmers LLC, sourcecode for the examples, up-to-date pointers to Web resources, and anonline bibiography, to to www.pragmaticprogrammer.com
Most likely, it does. Here is an article, Why Your Code Sucks by Dave Astels that will tell you why it does. Read the article as I think it’s great. After you read it, make sure you verify your code according to all of the points. Dave says that your code sucks if it meets the following criteria:
1. Your code sucks if it doesn’t work.2. Your code sucks if it isn’t testable.3. Your code sucks if it’s hard to read.4. Your code sucks if it’s not understandable.5. Your code sucks if it dogmatically conforms to a trendy framework at the cost of following good design/implementation practices.6. Your code sucks if it has duplication.
So, I ask you, does your code suck?
I think some of the code that I write sucks because it isn’t very easily testable. I think, though, that it is hard to test web applications and that’s the main reason behind it. I’m trying to find an easy way to do that so I can eliminate it. I agree with the author, your code should be easily testable. As far as the other points are concerned, I would say that my code is easy to read, easy to understand, and it does not have any duplication. I take extra care in those areas.
Are you looking to test me? Or maybe you just want to see how I stuck up against other IT guys? OK. OK. What I’m trying to say, is that it is always good to get a second opinion. So, I’m going to give you that second opinion (or more than one).
Here are a couple of links to pretty good Software Bookshelves from established software gurus. These lists “guide” me to what my next reading should be. I always like books recommended by others. It gives me a bigger determination to read it.
The best
Joel on Software: Book Reviews
Steve McConnell (my favorite author): Recommended Reading List
windchill23 (20+ Years Programming): MasterSoftwareDeveloper
Worth a look
Otaku Cedric (accomplished developer): books read
Arno Hutter (don’t know much about him): Software Bookshelf
Tom Van Vleck: Software Engineering Reading List
I really like McConnell’s lists as well as Joel’s list. Almost all of the books listed there are on my must-read books. Those are classics, basically. Tom Van Vleck’s list is good also. I like first couple, five I think, books from the Software Bookshelf.
There you go, now you can have few other sources. Plus, you might get a glimpse of things to see in my future reading.
Donald Bell, Philippe Kruchten, Gary Evans? Ring a bell? If not, they are all influential IT minds. And they all write articles that are published in The Rational Edge.
I have to say that The Rational Edge e-zine is probably the best newsletter that I subscribe to. The quality of the articles is great. Even though it mostly concentrates on the Rational Unified Process, it touches several others, like UML, book reviews, and other valuable information for a software engineer. (I do think however, that the Rational Unified Process (RUP) is the best software-engineering process.)
The archive section on the site is substantial, too. It offers articles that were written in the previous versions of The Rational Edge. I check back here often.
All in all, IBM is doing a good job in enticing software engineers. I highly recommend subscribing to the e-zine and looking through the archive, and/or searching for an article (using the search tool).
Yes, you cannot have both. It’s just not possible. That’s the stand of Johanna Rothman. She has some very interesting points.
“If you choose innovation, you can’t outsource,” she says. “You can’t define all the requirements and hand them off to anyone in a highly innovative product — requirements definition and product development have to be a joint exploration — and you can’t do that when the definers and the developers (and testers) don’t sit near each other. You can’t wait for a product to be done — you need to see the product unfold and adjust the product (or the project) to accommodate the things you forgot.”
It’s a different angle on outsourcing, but I think a valid one. You don’t get innovation from outsourcing. You get what you ask for. And that’s not always the case.
Read this short, but informative blog entry.
Adding Value Growing CareersThe Employment Outlook in Todays Increasingly Competitive IT Job
That’s the title of the study published by Information Technology Association of America. This is one of the best I’ve read. A little long, but the content is great.
Topics covered in the survey are: Size of the IT workforce Demand for IT workers Best background for IT employment Soft skills and other factors Employee retention Future sources of job
Here is a short excerpt:
Martin Fowler, to me, is a great IT mind. He has written three (that I know of) books that are on my must-read list. I I own the first two. All three are pretty much classics in the industry. They are: Refactoring, UML Distilled, and Patterns of Enterprise Architecture.
Fowler has also written countless articles on design (Is Design Dead? is my favorite) and architecture (mainly in IEEE Software magazine, where he is still the editor of Design).
Needless to say, Martin Fowler is an industry leader, great writer. He’s somebody that you should know about as a software engineer. (And read his books, too.)
That’s enough about him, the person, since this post is about his blog, Martin Fowler’s Bliki. I’ve been reading it for couple of months now. I think it’s pretty good. I’ve been enjoying it. It’s a bit on a technical side (he is an architect after all) but he touches several areas, mainly design, architecture, refactoring, uml, agile-development, and others. Add it to your RSS Reader (I use Bloglines) and enjoy it too.
I came across an interesting article, How To Survive The Coming Bust, recently — little dated, but still valuable. The author argues that you need to do the following six things to survive.
1) Provide Guarantees2) Analyze the business and provide a better solution3) Dramatically decrease the defect rate4) Create well-documented, maintainable code5) Provide better feedback6) Show the customer how you will make them money or allow them to cut costs
I think most of them hold true and I do think that we — software engineers — have a bright future indeed. Under one condition, though: we have to be better than our competition. We have to be better than those developers in other countries. We have to be the best. (I’ll create a post about how to thrive in a global IT market later.) It is possible, it just requires more work.
I come across a very interesting post today: a post that explains why Java is cool. I think the poster has some very good points about Java and I agree with him. Yeah, Java is cool and hopefully it will be cool for a long time. I’m excited about Java 1.5: it has some very nice features that will make Java more useful and easier. So why is Java cool? Here are the top-level reasons from the post (make sure you read his explanation on each one):
1. Java has considerably fewer surprises2. Java is not slow3. Swing is improving a lot4. Java’s libraries…5. Java has lots of good (free) IDEs6. Java is a programming platform
“So basically Java is cool because Java is for everybody. Not just a geek-only thing.”