The way to rank programmers is by how much they contribute to the bottom line. Shipping is important. Good developers are able to "move the chains" and help things get shipped. Bad developers hold up the process. Slippage can cost money.

I think there is a lot more to this than programming ability. Perfection can get in the way of getting things done. A "cog in the machine" mentality keeps developers from taking ownership and making key decisions. Good developers accept that they don't know everything and tackle an area they aren't good at anyways because there is nobody better available for the issue.

What you didn't define is, top 10% of what? All programmers? All available programmers for hire? All programmers who are working full time as programmers?

I'm not sure there is even a big enough gap between the top 1% and the top 10% to make much of a difference. If the determining factor is being able to ship, then the top .1 % is probably either shipping their own products or have significant ownership in the companies they are coding for.

Beyond that, it depends on how big your pool is. The best 1 out of 10 (10%) might be an average contributor just good enough to get in the door at a place not fighting for top talent. The top 1 out of 100 might be good enough to get an interview anywhere in Silicon Valley.