Software’s Unwelcome Advantage

Software’s Unwelcome Advantage

You can do anything in software. That’s the mantra, and it’s true. It’s why hordes of

eager computer science graduates, not to mention brilliant open source coders, keep

joining the ranks of software development. It’s fast, it’s fun, and you can make a

machine that does anything.

The fact that software is instructions to a machine (the “hard” in “hardware”) seems

to have been the only thing John Tukey had in mind when he coined the word “software”

back in 1958. (Dr. Tukey, an accomplished statistician, was more focused on

computerizing the Fast-Fourier Transform, and criticizing the Kinsey Report for its

questionable sampling methods.)

While software attracts developers with its ease in creating things, it tempts all of

us with its other “softness”: amenability to change. Software can be endless fixed,

extended, improved. And that advantage demands something of developers which was

unexpected, and, well … hard.

Hardware must fit form to function so it’s easy to use. And come with good

documentation for maintenance and repair. But that’s all on the outside. Software,

always ready for change, has to be clear and readable on the inside too. In other

words, software developers have to be good writers, because the next developer will

have to read and quickly understand what’s going on in order to change it. And those

written changes have to leave the software again in a clear and readable state.

Good writers? In high school, I avoided English class like the plague (and got bad

marks for using cliches in my papers), preferring to go into school on snow days to

use the (one) computer. Good writing is not why people become programmers. But it’s

exactly what we need. Clear written communication. Now equal in impact to life-

changing books (pen mightier than sword and all that), software crucially affects our

lives — from cars, to food transport, to the electric grid.

That good writing is unwelcome requirement of sofware is why developers code quickly

and obscurely, hate documentation, and shun code review. And  why managers push for

features, delivery, and fixes, while devaluing internal quality.

Is there hope? The only one I can think of must exploit these other likes and

dislikes: managers want software changes fast, while developers like writing new code

more than fixing someone else’s (or their own) bugs. Good writing is the only way to

make code support that scenario, and reap the real advantages of software.

You can do anything in software. Hordes of eager computer science graduates, not to mention brilliant open source coders, keep joining the ranks of software development because it’s fast and fun.

The fact that software is instructions to a machine (the “hard” in “hardware”) seems to have been the only thing John Tukey had in mind when he coined the word “software” back in 1958. (Dr. Tukey, an accomplished statistician, was more focused on computerizing the Fast-Fourier Transform, and criticizing the Kinsey Report for its questionable sampling methods.)

While software attracts developers with its ease in creating things, it tempts us all with its other “softness”: amenability to change. Software can be endlessly fixed, extended, improved. And that advantage demands something of developers which was unexpected, and, well … hard.

Hardware must fit form to function so it’s easy to use. And come with good documentation for maintenance and repair. But that’s all on the outside. Software, always ready for change, has to be clear and readable on the inside too. In other words, software developers have to be good writers, because the next developer will have to read and quickly understand what’s going on in order to change it.  Written changes, again, have to leave the software in a clear and readable state.

In high school, I avoided English class like the plague (and got bad marks for using cliches in my papers), preferring to go into school on snow days to use the (one) computer. Good writing is not why people become programmers. But it’s exactly what we need. Clear written communication. Equal in impact to life-changing books (pen mightier than sword and all that), software crucially affects our lives — from cars, to food transport, to the electric grid.

That good writing is an unwelcome requirement of sofware is why developers code quickly and obscurely, hate documentation, and shun code review. And  why managers push for features, delivery, and fixes, while devaluing internal quality.

Is there hope? The only one I can think of must exploit other likes and dislikes: managers want software changes fast, while developers like writing new code more than fixing someone else’s (or their own) bugs. Good writing is the only way to make code support that scenario, and reap the advantages of software.

Advertisement