|
Generally speaking you have to know a little about most things and be able to learn quickly what you don't already know. So I'm not sure what classification you would put that in.
E=mc2 -> BOOM
|
|
|
|
|
The first one would be me (the brain surgeon),
The second one would be everyone else (the podiatrists)
From one uttermost to the other, everything else in the middle is just filling in the blanks.
|
|
|
|
|
I have given it more thought... It's Saturday afternoon, there are some doctors that work Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00 (the dream job) and then there are others that work in the emergency room 95 hrs a week, on call and can't keep up. (that would be me)
|
|
|
|
|
Another large problem is who does the classifying. How exactly would you unify it on a national or even global basis?
The taxonomy would keep a dedicated sub commitee going for years...
BTW I voted no. Too many practical problems and not particulary desirable. Suppose you did manage to classify all programmers. How many programmers would appear in more than one category - the post further down about we're all general practioners (with specialisms) I agree with. What would you then do with the classifications? You wouldn't employ anybody on those classifications - you would still select based on skills and experience.
I self classify all the time when I send out a CV (resume). That's also what I base recruitment on - do they have the skills required, based on CV, interview or other techniques.
|
|
|
|
|
Ourselves will make the classification.
Each one for himself but with a small term.In my country there is a felony for promoters and advertisers (i dont know what exists in other countries) which is called "Public Audience Deception".Everyone who breaks the rule has to account for to his union and to the Justice.Its a serious offense.
I've met so many programmers allegating they know a whole bunch of things or developing unprofessional products.Many of them in the field of the battle turn out to know s**t and become a burden for the rest and for the corporation.
What's the consquences for them who lie to their collegues,employer,client via a cv or a louzy product ???
Every system needs regulations and normalization.If not its the natural tendency to move towards to higher entropy...to chaos.
Everyone can write anything he wants in his cv as long as he can prove it when asked or pay the price.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with predragzakisevic!
Also, the problem is that sometimes the CV is just needed to get the job and forgotten after it.
And unfortunately the jobs today still be "catch/given" to the friend of a friend of a friend...
BTW: Our viruses are faster 
--
It works better if you plug it in first 
|
|
|
|
|
You have some point that the CV may be forgotten as long as your assignment is something very diffirent from what you were hired for.If you work on what you declared in your cv nothing will be forgotten.
I had a traumatic experience lately.The personnel dept hired two programmers to join my team.One alleged to be a java guru and one a c++ expert.With no exaggeration they were completely dump.The java guy (with a master degree on cs  ) was writing everything in a sole class,didn't know what garbage collection is,no idea about jit etc. and the c++ guy drove me mad because he didn't know what a pointer is and had the attidute of Bill Gates and the second day asked me whether true represent digitally the value 1 or 0. 
THIS IS BASED ON A TRUE STORY 
-- modified at 23:23 Thursday 15th December, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes what makes that happen is that credits are given for some guys that just finished the univ and sometimes that same guys come out with no experience. Til last year, i was schooling Comp. Sc. Engineering (i made a break now) and the biggest desillusion for me came from the teachers part. Believe me... i found the dumpest people there.
---
It works better if you plug it in first
|
|
|
|
|
Yes unfortunately not an uncommon experience 
CVs are riddled with lies; any classification system that could eventually be agreed upon would be riddled with the same lies!
Just to go back to my original point slightly; what I really meant by "who would do the classification" was more about how we would agree what each classification was. I kind of took it as read that we would then apply the classifications to ourselves 
E.g.
You may call yourself a Network Programmer, I may call myself a TCP expert. Are they the same thing? Different things? Different only in X,Y or Z thing.
I've seen massive flame wars in the C++ community just on things like where to place your curly brackets or should member variables be prefixed with a "m". I do sincerley believe that forming common concensus amongst all of us for the classifications would be a massive problem in the real world.
Another real world problem would be that most programmers simply wouldn't use the classifications anyway. Or at least that's my prediction.
|
|
|
|
|
Hal Angseesing wrote: You may call yourself a Network Programmer, I may call myself a TCP expert. Are they the same thing? Different things? Different only in X,Y or Z thing.
I got your point now...You are right.
|
|
|
|
|
I dont think there are many developers who develops without the debugger or trail and error.
Imagine doctors doing that with each patient. )
Developers are skilled labours just like any other labour.
-prakash
|
|
|
|
|
Mr.Prakash wrote: Imagine doctors doing that with each patient.
Frankly, that is exactly what they do. And even worse, given the tools that exist (debuggers) for properly diagnosing each case (bug) on an individual, unique person (bug report), do they use them? No, because they're too lazy, run a meat market urgent care clinic, some stupid insurance company tells them what they can and cannot do treatment wise for a specific set of symptoms, and the drug companies have most doctors in their pocket anyways pushing pills harder than the guy at the street corner.
Frankly, comparing doctors with programmers is an insult to programmers, IMO.
(Do you get the idea that I don't hold doctors in high regard? You're right. I don't.)
Marc
VS2005 Tips & Tricks -- contributions welcome!
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Frankly, comparing doctors with programmers is an insult to programmers, IMO.
Yeah, at least we don't make people wait for hours in the waiting room.
My articles and software tools
|
|
|
|
|
>>Yeah, at least we don't make people wait for hours in the waiting room
But we do frequently miss deadlines, sometimes for several months. I would rather a product be late than on-time and full of bugs. And I would rather wait a little while in the waiting room, and expect the doctor take his time when it's my turn then for the doctor to say "times up" and not properly diagnose my problem.
-- modified at 9:41 Friday 16th December, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
>> Developers are skilled labours just like any other labour.
Exactly, its a craft at best and certainly doesn't require any creative skills, as many people here seem to think.
Formal qualifications are useful in determining how skilled a labourer you are.
|
|
|
|
|
There are many differences between a programmer and a medic.
For one, a programmer deals entirely with known technologies which have been developed by man and are comprised of completely understood fundamentals, the experience and value of the programmer can be rated on how much of these fundamentals the individual understands. A medic is working with the human body which is vastly unknown and not of man's design.
Secondly, a Doctor can only specialise in a certain field (say Neurology) as unlike programming, the brain, heart, lungs etc work very differently even though they may all be classed as "organs", they're functions share very little common functionality. Programmers work with basic fundamentals and specific protocols and share much of the same base knowledge as each other no matter what there choice of environment and tool.
If considering the example of a Doctor when referring to a programmer we can say that a neuro-surgeon would not in fact be a programmer, he would be a "CPU-Architect" and thus in a different field. All programmers can be considered General Practicioners which have the fundamental knowledge of the body/computer architecture and protocols but chooses to treat symptoms/develop solutions using different tools.
In Short - no, we shouldn't be classsified, we're all General Practicioners.
|
|
|
|
|
Craig Gilchrist wrote: with known technologies which have been developed by man and are comprised of completely understood fundamentals
I think there's a flaw in your assumption there.
Marc
VS2005 Tips & Tricks -- contributions welcome!
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah probably. The word "completely" could be replaced. Choose from:
-Partially
-slightly
-not at all
-sometimes
|
|
|
|
|
How about all of the above
|
|
|
|
|
If you think someone who had never done GUI work (and understand human-machine interaction, etc.) could instantly create a good interface because they are a "programmer" then you need to lay off the crack pipe.
Just like someone with a lousy math background couldn't write a great mathematical algorithm, even though they may be able to make a killer UI.
No, programmers do differ.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: If you think someone who had never done GUI work (and understand human-machine interaction, etc.) could instantly create a good interface because they are a "programmer" then you need to lay off the crack pipe.
You're talking about ability there, not skillset. Any programmer worth their salt can build a GUI of some description (good or bad) however a heart surgeon will never need to stich up your eyeball!
Jeremy Falcon wrote: No, programmers do differ.
I agree, but not to the same degree as the medical profession, and not enough to warrant formal classification.
Jeremy Falcon wrote: then you need to lay off the crack pipe.
Who told you about my crackpipe?
|
|
|
|
|
Craig Gilchrist wrote: You're talking about ability there, not skillset. Any programmer worth their salt can build a GUI of some description (good or bad) however a heart surgeon will never need to stich up your eyeball!
Ok, I'll give you that but to me they go hand in hand. If you're not able to do sometihng well then don't claim to be able to do it. Just like a heart doc could attempt to stich your eye, but you'd probably end up blind.
Craig Gilchrist wrote: I agree, but not to the same degree as the medical profession, and not enough to warrant formal classification.
I see your point. I for one don't like titles just as much as the next dev. In retrospect, I think my biggest issue with this is devs that claim to know everything like 30 languagues, etc. when they don't know one well.
I was thinking this could be one way to help say what they are really good at and just "ok", etc. at other stuff. Although, someone did moention certs, but still that's subjective on weither they are good. Of course, I supposed a title can be subjective too.
Craig Gilchrist wrote: Who told you about my crackpipe?
Logical deduction. All the programmers are using them now. You should try the CP one, it's shaped like Bob.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
As a doctor in spe (means that I'm studying medicine) I've got to add something:
1."the brain, heart, lungs etc work very differently even though they may all be classed as "organs", they're functions share very little common functionality."
No, No, NO. Of course they have a different behaviour and use, but the human body is not a collection of organs, but instead they all work together. One example: The heart controls the blood pressure (in a way , but itself is controled by N.vagus, which means: brain - and the kidneys, venes, ....
So, you see, everything belongs together and cannot be seperated.
2. "If considering the example of a Doctor when referring to a programmer we can say that a neuro-surgeon would not in fact be a programmer, he would be a "CPU-Architect" and thus in a different field. All programmers can be considered General Practicioners which have the fundamental knowledge of the body/computer architecture and protocols but chooses to treat symptoms/develop solutions using different tools."
Yeah, I'd agree to that. But remember, every doctor has to have knowledge about everything (in the body, of course) - and you'll be thankful for that once you get a heart attack when you visit a neuro-surgeon
(Indeed, this is the way it's handled in Germany, afaik that's a bit different in US).
3. One last thing: the medicine is now ca. 2000 years old, computer science about 100 (?), maybe, we'll all programmers will be classified in about 50 years?
Greetings and best wishes,
Andreas
|
|
|
|
|
Don't forget about the use of computers in medicine. In such situations, a formal clasificiation regulated similarly to that of the medical field may be appropriate.
Google the "therac 25" if you doubt the importance.
|
|
|
|
|
..
-- modified at 8:22 Wednesday 14th December, 2005
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
