Hacker News Reader

Comment by jaggederest | Hacker News Reader

Eh, the standard "I don't know which way is best, so there must not be any objectively better or worse ways".

There clearly is a correct way to develop software. It's just not clear that we've got enough experience with it to a) have found it, b) to recognize it, and c) to correctly confirm it to a reasonable degree.

As I commented on the article, the whole thing sounds a lot more silly if you replace "software development" with "building bridges" or the equivalent civil engineering task. There are clearly better, safer ways to construct bridges, and I'm fairly certain the same is true of software.

View on HN

When building the Golden Gate Bridge:

> Most speculated that a bridge would cost over $100 million.

> Joseph Strauss, who had designed nearly 400 bridges, claimed it could be built for $25 to $30 million.

> "Strauss was a strange, at times almost a self cancelling mixture of conflicting traits: promoter, mystic, tinkerer, dreamer, tenacious hustler, publicity seeker, and recluse. He was not a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers nor was he a graduate of a college of engineering."

http://www.structuremag.org/article.aspx?articleID=1493

What a load of baloney! There is no one true way to develop software; it depends on the person/team, the nature of the project, the schedule, and tons of other external factors. The same with building bridges actually; to follow the one true way means a lot of bridges falling down.

The best we can do is have enough experience and intelligence to choose methods appropriate to the context. That means hiring good developers...because process won't save us!

So you're saying choosing methods appropriate to the context and hiring good developers is the one true way to develop software?

Ah, that's a good one. Yes, if you want to call that a way.

Maybe not. Sometimes all you need is developers that are "good enough." I personally don't like hiring junior talent (mostly because I hate all of the hand holding it requires), but that doesn't mean it might not make business sense to go with the cheapest talent that can get the work done.

Ironically, if your company uses a lot of junior talent, the appropriate development methods might just require things like enforcing a JIRA ticket before code, always use TDD, etc.

Perhaps what I'm saying is the one true way to develop software is to choose your methodologies to maximize the effectiveness of your specific team to fulfill its specific end goal.

yes but why in the world would you compare "software development" to "building bridges"? I think this is a major fundamental problem with the entire field of Computer Science, approaching it like it is similar to civil engineering. Bridges are physical, software is abstract.

Creating software is much more similar to creating a legal system. Lots of legacy, nothing ever seems to work quite right. Vested interests.

SO what's the correct way to create a legal system that just works?

I think we're better served looking at incorrect ways to develop software, which are generally obvious and easier to sell each other on.

> There clearly is a correct way to develop software.

That is not at all "clear" to me. I've come across lots of wrong ways, to be sure, but that doesn't point to a singular correct path.

Your point will only valid when it is possible to clone developers. Since all developers are different there is no correct way.

be careful when you elevate "development" to "engineering". Any self-respecting man can put together a study desk for his son. That's development. But now if you want to build and sell desks to the public in such a way that we have to follow regulations and make a profit. Then that is engineering.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com