Xref: utzoo comp.unix.wizards:20810 comp.misc:8355
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.misc
Subject: Re: The *ART* of Computer Programming
Message-ID: <12253@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 28 Feb 90 13:44:05 GMT
References: <1990Feb26.234217.23251@aucs.uucp> <732@sppy00.UUCP> <25eb63c7.6a42@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Followup-To: comp.unix.wizards
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 17

In article <25eb63c7.6a42@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU> jdudeck@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (John R. Dudeck) writes:
-After a few years in the field, I have come to a personal commitment to
-practice good craftsmanship in everything I do.  If a program is worth
-writing it is worth writing well.  It requires great creativity to design
-and write good software.  It also results in good business, because good
-software has fewer problems, and this results in less maintenance cost.

All that is fine, and hurray for you.

-The programming standards of an organization don't stifle creativity, at
-least not the creativity of a disciplined craftsman, any more than they
-would in say, a cabinet shop.

Now, THAT depends on the standards.  It definitely is not true that ANY
standard is better than none.  For example, DoD contracts call for really
stupid deliverables, including documentation conforming to coding standards
that a good, experienced software craftsman would not voluntarily obey.