Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!usc!apple!netcomsv!jls
From: jls@netcom.COM (Jim Showalter)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Creativity in Computing (Was Re: Art vs. Engineering)
Message-ID: <1991May15.175310.6025@netcom.COM>
Date: 15 May 91 17:53:10 GMT
References: <1991May9.124559.2924@ssd.kodak.com> <4315@meaddata.meaddata.com> <2382@ccadfa.adfa.oz.au> <1991May14.125356.6675@bellcore.bellcore.com>
Sender: netnews@netcom.COM (USENET Administration)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  UNIX System {408 241-9760 guest}
Lines: 41
Originator: jls@netcom.netcom.com

duncan@ctt.bellcore.com (Scott Duncan) writes:

>Some time ago, I posted a note related to creativity where I suggested that
>it had long been associated with implementation (algorithmic) concerns rather
>than application (design) ones.  I did not hear from anyone at that time on
>this point.  However, given Geoff's post, perhaps the comment bears repeating.

>Do folks think that "creativity" in software is still very much focused on
>the implementation of algorithms rather than the solution of an application
>problem?  In some sense, even the excitement over object-oriented approaches
>seems to get back to the creation of methods and classes and components.  It
>seems to be left to the methodologists to discuss how this technology can be
>applied to solving real-world problems.  And "methods" (one element of the
>"discipline" Geoff mentions) have not always been popular with "real program-
>mers."

Henry Ford said an engineer was someone who could do for a dime what any
damn fool could do for a dollar. I think this is as applicable to the realm
of software as it is to any other technical discipline. A software engineer
looks for justifications for NOT writing yet another piece of code. If a
chunk of software is available off-the-shelf that meets the criteria of the
application, then a software engineer will HAPPILY use it instead of running
out to reinvent the wheel for the eleventy-thousandth time--the software
engineer does not regard this as "cramping" his/her creativity: quite the
contrary, the creativity in this case was in recognizing this clever way
to avoid writing some code and thereby save the project lots of time and
money. Emphasizing creativity only where it concerns algorithmic implementation
not only wastes time and money, but gives programmers a greatly inflated
sense of their contribution to the project, particularly since, to a large
extent, programming in the small is a relatively trivial achievement (it can't
be all that difficult--MILLIONS of people know how to do it, in contrast
with the scarcity of those who can devise a good architecture for an entire
project). As software managers become increasingly sophisticated and savvy
about the BUSINESS side of things, it is my fervent hope that software
production will become increasingly disciplined, constrained, business-focussed,
and less and less "creative" (as the term is currently understood).
-- 
**************** JIM SHOWALTER, jls@netcom.com, (408) 243-0630 *****************
* Proven solutions to software problems. Consulting and training in all aspects*
* of software development. Management/process/methodology. Architecture/design/*
* reuse. Quality/productivity. Risk reduction. EFFECTIVE OO techniques. Ada.   *