The One Thing Every Software Engineer Should Know | Hacker News Reader

The One Thing Every Software Engineer Should Know

codinghorror.com

49 pointsbdotdub33 comments

The title made me think about what my answer would be. If there's one thing a programmer should know, what is it? What is the most important thing I didn't understand about programming when I started doing it?

My answer would be: that code should be seen not as a static thing, like the answer to a math problem, but as an evolving effort to figure out the right question to be the answer to; and that it should thus be written to be easy to change.

Coming up with "The" one thing a programmer should know seems too narrow a question. Kind of like "What is your favorite song?" instead of "What are some of your favorite songs?" A more interesting question might be "What things would you emphasize to someone learning to program?" Flexibility? Precision? My answer:

Every programmer should

1. Learn C / Assembly - Understand how code interacts with hardware.

2. Learn Lisp - Understand how ideas interact with code (and vice versa).

3. Learn "O" notation - Understand algorithm complexity.

4. Be clean and flexible.

5. Write unit tests.

6. Refactor mercilessly.

7. sleep

8. goto 1

code should be [...] an evolving effort to figure out the right question to be the answer to

Interesting change of perspective. Could you expound - do you mean this in terms of product design?

No, not just product design. Practically all programs are best seen as explorations.

In an industrial design class I took this sort of methodology was heavily stressed using words like "divergent thinking" and "no-worry prototypes".

Generally, I believe that the super-specializing niche engineering that's popular today is best served by broadening your base rather than sharpening your technical skills to stand out in a field of pins.

I.e. marketing, ID design attitudes, learning to paint.

Isn't looking for the one thing an instance of the same problem?

Your answer is a better one for software engineers, Atwood's is the better one for software entrepreneurs.

This is true of many industries. I have a friend who is a wonderful painter. People who see his work tend to think highly of it. Problem is, he only knows people who are "into art." He refuses to market his product. I kind of see a parallel here. Great code is great art. The next step is presenting it to people in a way which shows how it benefits them.

An odd post from Jeff Atwood.

He (sort of) defines Marketing as:

   1. people understand what you're doing
   2. people become interested in what you're doing
   3. people get excited about what you're doing

I would say it was more about people understanding what your product can do for them, identifying it's value and thus parting with their money.

That's conflating marketing and advertising when they're actually two different things. Think of marketing as the social component of design.

You wouldn't start coding without at least a rudimentary spec to guide what it is you want to make, right? So why start designing your product without first identifying what and for whom it is you are designing it?

Marketing is the process of identifying the target market for your product. The "what it does" and "who it's for" part that a design needs if you're going to "build something people want".

I think you nicely describe the planning part of marketing - but you have to include the execution where you reach out to your target market. Advertising (in all it's forms) is a crucial tool of marketing.

Except that advertising isn't marketing: It's advertising. They're different things related to your business and should be handled differently.

I've run into a few companies who have painfully put an 'advertising guy' in charge of their marketing department and it's not worked well (in my limited sample). People are often great at advertising but couldn't put a decent product strategy together to save their life (or job!).

You wouldn't put your web developer or icon designer in charge of system administration or database scaling, right? Just like non-coders tend to lump everything technical together as 'computer stuff', technical folks can fall into the trap of lumping accounting, marketing, advertising, etc. into the same batch as 'business stuff'. That path leads to madness.

That sounds like a rephrasing of his #2 and #3

I don't think so.

I don't think it is up to the ultimate consumer to become interested in what we (as developers) are doing. I think it is up to us to explain to them just what problem we are going to solve or just how we are going to save them time or money.

Thats marketing - identify the target market. Convince that market segment that they need your product and then make sure that you don't put obstacles in their way while they are trying to buy it.

I think that some of the best products will come from programmers who find audiences with whom to coevolve the product: getting into a tight feedback loop with a bright bunch of alpha or beta testers.

"...and thus parting with their money."

If I'm not misunderstanding the Y-Combinator philosophy (for lack of a better term), this is premature optimization.

Focus on making something people want, and you will then be able to find a way to persuade people to part with their money. 1 - 3 above should, I think, be highly correlated with "make something people want."

(To pre-empt charges of "appeal to authority", consider this an argument with a proper citation. :)

"people understanding what your product can do for them, identifying it's value and thus parting with their money."

A developer's product is themselves. It's about marketing yourself, To coworkers, bosses, interviewers, VC's, future partners, clients, etc.

It's not big M Marketing selling crap to people.

I like the fundamental premise of his post, but I am (metaphorically) downmodding it for presentation. His blog is beginning to look like it is hosted by INET-WEB: http://www.inet-web.com/creativeGeniusWebDevelopers.asp. Jokes aside, the danger I see here is that people might presume that when he says "marketing," he means bombarding people with gaudy images and superficial ornamentation.

That is not marketing. And furthermore, Jeff ought to know better. I suggest he read this: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000834.html.

Marketing vs. engineering is a common issue within a company and coming out of a failed startup - NOT marketing enough was part of the problem. The product did not sell itself, and many engineers mistakenly believe their product is simply that GREAT. It's often not (and I don't mean this negatively because engineering a GOOD product is very challenging to say the least), so be careful not to drink too much of your own kool-aid.

Historically, consumption has been driven by brand appeal which is defined by form (brand), function (product), and message (definition)... you'd be surprised how many great products have bad brands and lost in translation.

I may be one of the few hackers that loves marketing as much as I do programming. I often split my reading time between both subjects. (And personal development.)

For me, marketing is exactly like hacking code. Except that it's hacking for humans! Even though humans tend to appear inconsistent, there are patterns (just like in code!) that you can leverage.

The bottom line is this: my marketing allows me to do more of the programming I love.

The annoying thing with humans is how hard they are to refactor.

"We can debug relationships, but it's always good policy to consider the people themselves to be features. People get annoyed when you try to debug them." --Larry Wall, second State of the Onion speech

"Identifying, anticipating and satisfying customer requirements profitably." Chartered Institute of Marketing’s definition of Marketing

nice article, though i'm not sure that's the One Thing. my one thing would be 'know your audience'. that's part message and part usability. if you're designing an app for engineers you design the ui very different than if you're designing it to allow residents of the local retirement community to self-schedule dinner deliveries.

that said:

if you're a resident in a company with a separate marketing team, it's key to speak their language -- after all, the people you're going to be marketing -to- is the marketing team. it's their job to get the message out, it's your job to be sure they know what the message is, and what it isn't. make sure you don't oversell, and let them know what would be overselling, and promote key features internally; they'll get external through the firm's marketing wing.

if you're a startup, marketing is doubly important. if you can't sell a friend on the idea of a product, you won't be able to sell the public. if your startup idea is complex, you're going to have to find a way to make it intelligible in ten seconds by picking the key features you want understood. and everyone in a startup is on the marketing team, whether they like it or not.

it's really worth it to read a book or two on marketing, if for no other reason than to get the lingo down. i've found my suggestions much better received when i could speak market-speak to the marketing team and sales team, and promote effectively to civilians. i recommend 'the culting of brands' by doug atkin as a good start.

My guess at the one thing:

Aim at the use, not the truth. Think about what it's supposed to do. This is helpful at all scales, from code snippet to a whole business. It's similar to finding the right question, before finding the right answer. Sometimes, it enables you to simplify dramatically.

I don't think that lack of marketing skills is a real problem. You could have a friend that would do it for you. Think Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs.

It's ok to be bad in marketing and good in hacking as long as you are not alone.

er, yeah, but look at where Jobs ended up versus Woz. Sure, Woz did well, but I can't help thinking he got taken advantage of along the way.

Part of the problem is that we look at marketing as being different than the hack. However, marketing is just social hacking. A true hacker isn't confined to one realm.

If that were true then software teams would be make up of marketing gurus, who code on the side.

I've never seen a software team that didn't need to improve the way it communicated it's ideas to other areas of the business.

I've never seen another area of business that didn't need to improve the way it communicated it's ideas to the software team.

Marketing isn't a dirty word. It isn't advertising. It's the art of persuasion.

So, it is true, and in actual fact software teams would be made up of developers who are highly effective communicators.

You're absolutely right. In an ideal world software developers could do their art for the shear appreciation of it. But for practical reasons, we need money and other resources to do that. It only makes sense to convince others how valuable the craft is to them so that we are empowered to do it.

If smart engineers would just look at it as simply another problem to be solved -- people hacking -- we'd be set.

By some accounts you have just described 37signals.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com