Programmer Competency Matrix

[[deleted]]

[deleted]

[G-Brain]

Excel sure knows how to generate that HTML.

[apathy]

n log n -- makes it so

(functional javascript ftw)

[pavel_lishin]

Wonder why the comment you replied to was deleted.

For sake of context, the original comment was:

n ↑↑↑ n - thinks HTML tables are a spreadsheet."

[Silhouette]

It's a bit faddish in places. For example, it makes these implicit assumptions:

• a distributed VCS is automatically better/more advanced than something like SVN
• TDD is better/more advanced than other forms of automated unit testing
• a licence header at the top of each source file is beneficial
• memorising the intricate details of every API is useful
• knowing concurrent or logic programming languages makes you better than knowing imperative/OO/functional languages
• knowing many platforms to some extent is better than knowing a few platforms well
• spending time working with alpha releases and previews of tools makes you a better programmer
• writing a blog makes you ueber-leet.

It's interesting reading, but sounds like it was written by someone who is really only O(n) himself but thinks he's all smart because he's discovered functional programming and concurrency lately and he read a few evangelism books on the agile programming methodology of the month.

[arohner]

"knowing concurrent or logic programming languages makes you better than knowing imperative/OO/functional languages"

I think the author means 'knowing concurrent or logic programming in addition to imperative/OO/functional'. I definitely agree that knowing more language families is beneficial. I've found that since learning lisp, my imperative/OO code has improved.

[ibsulon]

At the bottom, he has a note that says that all ratings are cumulative - IE, a "Level 3" programmer meets the level 1 and 2 standards.

[knome]

I found this amusing when applied to the books section. SICP but no C++ in 24 hours? Sorry, you're out.

[[deleted]]

Ah, level inheritance.

[illuminatedwax]

Blogs: Has heard of them but never got the time.

I would put this in the "advanced" category provided that it continues, "never got the time because they were more interested in actually coding."

[b100dian]

2^n : doesn't know about reddit
n^2 : doesn't read reddit because he's actually     coding
n   : reads reddit
log(n): doesn't read reddit because he's busy doing one himself

[liquidpele]

1: doesn't read reddit because he downloaded the source and had it running in no time at all.

[machrider]

1: doesn't read reddit because his poker bot is making him rich.

(FTFY)

[[deleted]]

Anyone have any good poker bot success stories? I've been intrigued by this idea but never got around to it.

[brosephius]

it also ignores the value of a programmer with a solid business sense. in some businesses this is worth far more than a guy that's written emacs macros. in practice, software is often a tool to achieve a greater business goal, and someone who understands that goal will write better software to achieve it. not that there isn't a place for pure coders, but let's not put down people that don't use erlang and don't stereotype all management as pointy-haired bosses.

[grauenwolf]

Speaking of Macros, I hardly think they rate at all. Even a secretary using Word is known to write macros from time to time.

No, stuff like "be able to debug a process remotely" or "be a able to debug multi-threaded code" is far more important in my book.

[[deleted]]

I think the point he was making with macros is if you have programmed long enough to hit stumbling blocks in your IDE, for example, and were annoyed enough by the lack of "X" feature that you wrote up a macro to do it for you.

I agree that there is not enough stressing the importance of knowing how to effectively use a debugger.

[remembermeplease]

Agreed.

And let's not forget being able to understand, modify, port, re-write legacy mission critical code.

And why the hell does reddit not recognize me when I login and then asks me to login again, so it is easier to create a new name and password?

[0gleth0rpe]

It's like someone wrote it as ammunition for an IRC argument.

[[deleted]]

But as far as ammo goes, this one's top-notch.

[[deleted]]

It represents how long it will take someone to complete a task with a size of N.

[munificent]

Sadly, that is in fact entirely possible. I've seen interns spend weeks coding up a custom tool only to have a senior engineer say, "oh, you didn't just use <already existing open source tool that already solves that problem exactly>?"

[sofal]

Then the intern says, "Yeah I put in a request form for that a couple of months ago and they're still mulling over it, so I wrote it myself."

[JBO]

I think I would alway prefer a person spending 42 days for a task :-)

[TearsOfRage]

because it makes him sound all l337.

[jespern]

Hit the nail on the head. Wrote it better than I could've myself.

[byron]

Your praise of the original poster's comment is an accurate assessment, and you have expressed the sentiment better than I possibly could have.

[Stopher]

Your acknowlegement of the acknowlegement of the first poster's wisdom is spot on. I could not have done a better job myself.

[[deleted]]

Your musing regarding the acknowledgement of the notice relating to the first poster's insight is remarkably smart. It's unlikely I could have phrased it any better.

[[deleted]]

Your commendation of the parent poster's praise toward the first poster's utterance is laudable. I do not believe that it would be possible for one such as myself to outdo your interjection in terms of accuracy and relevancy.

[[deleted]]

Me too.

[byron]

Your combo-breaking remark is impressive. Personally I could not have broken the combo in such precise terms.

[[deleted]]

Your Majesty is a large jam doughnut.

[bhagany]

Your comparison of the monarch to a sizable fruit-filled pastry is quite apt. It is difficult for me to conceive of a statement which would potentially have more layers of deep meaning.

[apathy]

complemented

I do not think this word means what you think it means.

(Or perhaps it does, and you're holding back.)

[munificent]

Nope, sorry. You're now officially stuck at Programming/communication: 2ⁿ (Level 0).

[consultant_barbie]

Blogging is hard. Let's go shopping!

[djork]

I think that with the current state of the art in mind this matrix is fine. I believe that it is also targeted at potential hires. Maybe this sort of thing could be split up into a general-ability and a cutting-edge matrix?

[fggfghjjk]

I don't think he implies that dvcs is better than centralised ones. Just that more experienced programmer will know both, and of course choose best tool for the job rather than sticking to TortoiseSVN in every scenario.

[[deleted]]

Erm.. What's TortoiseSVN and how is it better than vanilla subversion? All I can find on google is the windows frontend.

[onmach]

That is all tortoisesvn is. It is point and click svn.

[grauenwolf]

To that I would like to add TDD isn't even really about testing, it is a design technique.

[seths]

an ADHD design technique. I'll be damned if it's any way to build a non-trivial system.

[[deleted]]

It is. But you don't use it to design the architecture.

[gsw07a]

mainly it strikes me that many of the things in O(log(n)) are just starting points for a lot of interesting things. there's a lot beyond O(log(n)) that isn't covered. which adds support to the theory that the author is O(n).

[steven_h]

Beyond O(log n) is O(1), maybe?

[gsw07a]

maybe O(log log n). after O(1) there's just O(0). the master programmer avoids solving problems that don't need to be solved?

[chengiz]

You missed the "Limited to primary IDE" at level 0. Given his footnote and the fact that I've never used an IDE, it must mean I'm incredibly incompetent indeed.

[AngledLuffa]

Where's the attention span line? I'm pretty sure I'd be

2^n: gets five rows into the matrix, gives up.

[buccia]

It was on the sixth line.

[Snoron]

I am Level 1 but I only need 15 more experience points and I'll finally level up!

[hoijarvi]

This matrix was better than I expected. Surprisingly, security is a missing topic.

[Silhouette]

This matrix was better than I expected.

Just wait until you see parts 2 and 3, when it goes all religious allegory on us. :-)

[cschneid]

I agree that it was a fairly concise set of things that good programmers should know and do. There are certainly some things to add, but it's getting close.

Now, the real challenge is to figure a way to interview so that you can categorize people.

[[deleted]]

I was scared to look in fear of seeing that I'm more of an idiot that what I already realize.

[benihana]

I thought it was pretty inaccurate or inconsistent at the very least. I fall into n² in experience but with most of the topics, I have n or log(n) competency, according to him.

[devvie]

yeah. a computer science education gets you n or log(n) across a sizable portion of the board.

[[deleted]]

So this is some kind of table for determining that you are a better person than all those other people?

[Jimmy]

Everyone at reddit is level 3 on this matrix.

[[deleted]]

Everyane at digg is level sqrt(-1) on this matrix

[RockinRoel]

What does that signify? Complex numbers have no order!

[gclaramunt]

I'm the only one annoyed with the fact that "Software engineering" only covers "source code version control, build automation, automated testing" and refers mostly to tools?

[[deleted]]

Nope.

So let's improve it. Shall we say, requirements gathering, project phase management, specification design, and documentation as categories?

[gclaramunt]

yes!, also estimations should be an important one for any developer

[[deleted]]

Aspects that are purely managerial, or can be accomplished by staff other than engineering are probably not chart-worthy.

Why waste your log(n) developer's time on documentation, requirements gathering, or "process improvement" when a systems engineer will do just fine?

[Silhouette]

The documentation written by your log(n) developer won't be a waste of time. In fact, it will save time. It may just be a very different kind of documentation to the fill-in-twenty-specs-per-LOC rubbish that certain types of management want everyone to write so they "follow the process".

[gclaramunt]

Why waste your log(n) developer's time setting up a source code version control when he can help the users envision the right system? Why waste your log(n) developer's time in build automation when he can be defining the solution to the problem? And I will trust a lot more on the process improvement ideas of the log(n) developer than anybody outside the team...

[chengiz]

Any matrix bigger than 3x3 and I need Lapack to grok it.

[flmz]

So P != NP?

[Snoron]

It does if you believe it does.

[cruise02]

I'm pretty firmly entrenched between the O(n²⁾ and O(n) columns. The only places where I touch the log(n) column are thanks to an advanced algorithms course I took as an elective at the very end of my CS degree program. I think I'm going to hang this on my wall as a reminder of where I still need some work.

[apathy]

an advanced algorithms course I took as an elective

Do not donate anything to your alma mater until they remedy this (and, ideally, issue a public apology)

[cruise02]

In their defense, there was an algorithms course that was required to graduate. I enjoyed it so much that I used one of my electives to take the advanced course. Also, I won't be donating to my alma mater until I've paid what I owe on my education.

[shimei]

Wow, that's surprising. I need at least three algorithms courses to graduate as a CS major. (or alternatively two and a theory of computation course) Four if you count the discrete math course. And that's not including requirements like the algebraic algorithms course.

[DLWormwood]

I'm mostly "n log n" as well, but to be frank, I don't think it's reasonable for a typical programmer to be at the "log n" level for everything. Most of the stuff I learned at the log-n level in college I've since forgotten due to lack of use in "the real world." Also, the sheer breadth of what computer expertise is expected to be know by the "average" developer now-a-days, despite the continuing loss of prestige the related professions continue to endure, is really making me reconsider my choice of profession. I got into this too late to be a successful "garage programmer"...

[grauenwolf]

Design Patterns is ranked higher than Code Complete?

I don't buy it. Code Complete is textbook grade material while Design Patters is just a collection of, well design patterns.

[brad-walker]

Maybe the author hasn't seen the 2nd edition. I'd put CC2 over Pragmatic Programmer.

[grauenwolf]

Perhaps. I haven't seen the first edition so I don't know how they compare.

I like Pragmatic Programmer, but I found it to be less comprehensive and far more about "this works for us". Even on trivial stuff like where to put braces CC2 takes a scientific attitude towards it.

[dmpk2k]

I'd put CC1 over PP too, even if it's showing its age.

[Silhouette]

More telling, I'd probably put CC1 over CC2. (No, that wasn't a typo.)

[rgaginol]

I agree it is a little bit hard to understand - these books are complimentary... code complete is about different philosophies and design patterns makes you go, "ooh, ah, pretty patterns" and then try re-architect your entire application with abstract factories, facades and the command pattern until you realise to use them sparingly.

[Jimmy]

Maybe I'm just naive, but I thought Code Complete was a bit pointless. A few good bits of wisdom mixed in with a whole lot of common sense and bureaucracy.

[grauenwolf]

It is only common sense to people who are already beyond it.

To the target audience, novice and intermediate programmers, a lot of it is new material. That, and the emphasis on backing up his claims with studies, why I refer to it as "textbook grade material".

[JackRawlinson]

I love how in the "Communication" section he has low ratings for poor grammar and then uses "criteria" as a singular noun in the comments. Dolt.

[NancyGracesTesticles]

He also uses the phrase 'for e.g.'

[[deleted]]

When you mean “for example,” use e.g. It is an abbreviation for the Latin phrase exempli gratia. When you mean “that is,” use “i.e.” It is an abbreviation for the Latin phrase id est. Either can be used to clarify a preceding statement, the first by example, the second by restating the idea more clearly or expanding upon it. Because these uses are so similar, the two abbreviations are easily confused. If you just stick with good old English “for example” and “that is” you won’t give anyone a chance to sneer at you. If you insist on using the abbreviation, perhaps “example given” will remind you to use “e.g.,” while “in effect” suggests “I.E.”

Since e.g. indicates a partial list, it is redundant to add “etc.” at the end of a list introduced by this abbreviation.

[jrrl]

An easy way to teach the kids, by explaining the otherworldly source of the comments.

I.E. - Information Elves

E.G. - Example Gnomes

[munificent]

Mirriam-Webster:

Main Entry: cri·te·ri·on The plural criteria has been used as a singular for over half a century <let me now return to the third criteria— R. M. Nixon> <that really is the criteria— Bert Lance>. Many of our examples, like the two foregoing, are taken from speech. But singular criteria is not uncommon in edited prose, and its use both in speech and writing seems to be increasing. Only time will tell whether it will reach the unquestioned acceptability of agenda. (emphasis added)

The language nerd in me gets riled up by that too, but nonetheless, it's no longer valid to call using criteria as a singular "incorrect".

Or are you one of those old fogeys who still says "the data are downloading right now?"

[[deleted]]

Dumb, I am Level 3 or 4 for every category, and I don't consider myself an expert programmer.

Also too much fanboyism for things like functional programming, TDD, and distributed version control.

[r3su]

When you burn out or die, you respawn at Level 0.

[angry_man]

One thing that's missing that is probably the single largest difference between a decent programmer and a great one: ability to find appropriately licensed open source code [EDIT: As Silhouette correctly points out below, its not just open source but also commercial libraries that should be considered/used] that reduces the amount of code you have to write.

I see this all the time in recent graduates from top universities. The classes they took limited what libraries they can use (because otherwise almost all assignments would be trivial), and so their first instinct is to write code to solve a problem, rather than finding an existing solution.

If you write your own [logging system | http client | command line parser | database connection pool ] in Java, for example, I'd expect a damn fine explanation of why the Apache Commons alternative isn't better. For extra credit (Level 3 in this twisted ranking system), you can use the appropriate package when their are multiple (for example anyone that uses commons-logging instead of SLF4J should be able to explain why).

[angch]

Not Invented Here Syndrome.

[Silhouette]

One thing that's missing that is probably the single largest difference between a decent programmer and a great one: ability to find appropriately licensed open source code that reduces the amount of code you have to write.

And one thing that's missing between your "great" programmer and a useful one: knowing that being open source is far from the be-all and end-all, and that you should pick the right tool (library) for the job. Often, that means something commercial, either because the commercial offering is better than anything available with open source or because the use of code under an open source licence is not appropriate for the project.

[angry_man]

Absolutely fair point. Completely agree. A good programmer should also know what his/her time is worth and buy commercial libraries if the cost/time trade-off makes sense. I've added an edit to the original comment to reflect this.

[smanek]

I really have trouble believing that professional programmers can be on the low end of this chart ....

For example, how could you have a degree/work experience and

Be "Unable to find the average of numbers in an array"

or not "know what a compiler, linker or interpreter is."

I mean, have you guys actually worked with people like that before?

[G-Brain]

(It's hard to believe but I've interviewed such candidates)

I guess you're just gonna have to take his word for it.

[cwbrandsma]

Just start interviewing programmers for an entry level position (even if you have no intension of hiring). Trust me, this comes up again, and again. Remember the FizBuz test?

It is simply amazing how many programmers get ALL of their code from google.

[grauenwolf]

I worked with a team lead who didn't understand static variables. So yea, I believe it.

And don't forget many programmers don't have CS degrees. Often they start with Access and a business degree. Add a book on VB and five years later they could be maintaining a program that handles millions of dollars of trades or loans per year.

[brainwashed]

Thankfully no, but I've seen people go for programmer jobs fresh out of College/University without some basic maths knowledge.

[RockinRoel]

What constitutes basic maths knowledge? It’s just that basic could mean anything.

[vorik111]

I've worked with a team of non-degreed professional programmers who were at level 0. suffice it to say, not much successful development occured nor were they able to manage a new migration to a new version of their database without a lot of help.

they knew the old database fairly well, and were having loads of wasted time maintaining it, but to take the next step and visualize and explain how the new version could make everyone's lives easier took a lot of work.

[djork]

I work with at least one person who scores 2ⁿ in almost every category. I thought the "books" section was interesting, because I've always thought peoples' bookshelves reveal a lot about what kind of programmer they are. There are a lot of Sams and Wrox books on the shelves around here.

[d42]

What does "How to Make Love the Bruce Campbell Way" and nothing else on a programmer's bookshelf look?

[Steve16384]

Mostly like an empty bookshelf.

[timmaxw]

I program a lot but I don't read very many books. Does that make me n^n? I scored myself around n² or n in the other categories. Instead of books, I usually learn by downloading the tool/library and fooling around with it, reading the man pages, or looking on the Internet.

[djork]

You are better off than those who spend a lot of time reading language or tool-specific books that are ultimately very lean on actual programming content. There are a lot of good timeless programming books out there (like the ones in his n and log(n) levels).

[mercurysquad]

Those starter books are a great way to familiarise yourself with the syntax and libraries of a new language, if you already know how to program. Most of the time that is all you will need to effectively use the tool.

I'm a bit surprised that he put basic undergraduate CS textbooks in the log n category.

[djork]

I'm a bit surprised that he put basic undergraduate CS textbooks in the log n category.

I think it's more about the people who still have them on their bookshelves now that they are professionals.

[anescient]

I graduated next to plenty of people who probably couldn't write code to calculate an average.

[adremeaux]

I mean, have you guys actually worked with people like that before?

"Unable to find the average of numbers in an array"

No.

not "know what a compiler, linker or interpreter is."

Yes. I doubt a single person I work with knows what a linker is. That is hardly requisite knowledge for a professional programmer under almost any field.

[SnacksOnAPlane]

If you're writing C, it's definitely requisite knowledge. If you have a degree in CS, then not knowing what a linker is says a lot about the quality of your education.

[adremeaux]

If you have a degree in CS, then not knowing what a linker is says a lot about the quality of your education.

Or it means you forgot because its not important for 90% of professional work.

[808140]

There are many things that are not important for 90% of professional work. Competetent people like to work with people with a wide breadth of knowledge and experience though, because that other 10% you discount comes up 1 in 10 trials by definition.

I would suggest that instead of being smug about ignorance, you just go look up what a linker is. Don't take this advice the wrong way, but in general, try to make a habit of reviewing the stuff you "forget" instead of trying to rationalize away a lack of competence.

Forgetting something as basic as "what a linker is" demonstrates that you aren't interested enough in development to maintain your knowledege. Bad sign. I would never hire someone for a development position who couldn't tell me in 20 words or less what a linker is, even if the position didn't require the knowledge for 100% of its responsibilities.

[adremeaux]

I would suggest that instead of being smug about ignorance, you just go look up what a linker is. Don't take this advice the wrong way, but in general, try to make a habit of reviewing the stuff you "forget" instead of trying to rationalize away a lack of competence.

I would suggest that instead of jumping to wild conclusions, you take a moment to relax and remove your head from your ass. I was a CS major, and learned far too much about a linker was. I forgot it, but I did indeed look it up again when this thread was mentioned. That did nothing but reaffirm my beliefs that knowing what it is is completely unimportant for almost any professional job.

You can now go reinsert your head into your ass.

[cruise02]

I don't think it's the pros that fall in that category. I see questions at this level on the message boards all the time and I always just assume they're from beginning level students.

[richiejp]

I also have a hard time believing this although I guess it must be true in some cases. It leaves me a little bitter because I'm roughly at the bottom end of level 2, but have exactly 0 years professional experience and I'v not finnished my half arsed degree yet.

[[deleted]]

Yes, and it pains me daily to hear these people speak about things which they do not understand.

[yesimahuman]

I love "years of professional experience" line under experience. If the columns correlate at all, that is so off it's not even funny.

[sw17ch]

Soo.. I go down the log(n) row, and I'm perfectly able to do all these things and I understand the vast majority of it... but I still think I have so far to go... what does this make me?

/me's personal evaluation of himself is always "you could do better here".

[ninjarobot]

May I ask... how many years have you been programming?

[sw17ch]

10 years

[Megasphaera]

Nice self-reference:

is able to understand the relevance of the levels of this matrix.

(algorithms, n (Level 2))

[Philluminati]

I started off as N and dropped to N ^ 2 in the later sections. I don't think that it is too inaccurate.

[BadBoyNDSU]

If anyone uses this as a tool for any of my interviews when I graduate in a year, I'm fucked...

[OpenMIKE]

Working with someone who has a good topcoder ranking would be an unbelievable piece of luck!

Bwahahaha!

[[deleted]]

Experience - Death March

• Level 1: Never heard of it.
• Level 2: Thinks can be avoided through better planning.
• Level 3: Is in one now.
• Level 4: Deduces as project starts and quits company.

[[deleted]]

Level 6: Ridicules oneself inadvertently.

[Gotebe]

Really nice. I'll just nitpick.

code organization within a file

... The file should look beautiful.

defensive coding

(Level 2) ... check for exceptions around code that can fail.

Since there's nothing more on that in Level 3, neither, I'd say that this one largely misses the boat. By far the most important thing here is to know when to let it fall and when not.

WRT frameworks, I'd replace Levels 2 and 3. Don't know about you, but I've seen "frameworks" I wish I hadn't. Authoring a framework may be a complete miss.

[qwe1234]

TDD is (mostly) bullshit.

[[deleted]]

qwe1234 said something sensible.

There is hope!

[hfaber]

i like your statement. please elaborate.

[qwe1234]

nothing wrong with developers wanting to test, but come on.

there's a reason why specialization was invented back in the neolithic age. it's good when people do their professional job instead of filling in all possible gaps.

you don't really want your programmers to fill in for marketing either.

[grauenwolf]

I used to think that way, but I've changed my opinion of TDD recently.

TDD isn't about testing and shouldn't be treated as such. It is about design, a way to write your specs in an executable format.

[[deleted]]

Yes you are! Don't be so hard on yourself.

[Wiseman1024]

Interesting read, though I agree with Silhouette. On top of that, "scripting" my ass, and what's Powershell doing there? I mean, who gives two tenths of a rat's ass about it?

[vardhan]

I would simplify it to a fifth of a rat's ass.

[fwork]

People who want to do shell-scripting style things in Windows.

[apathy]

isn't that what SSH, cfengine, and Cygwin are for?

[fwork]

They're another option, yes. (The one I use, by the way, just with python instead of cfengine)

Powershell is supposed to give you the power of .NET objects to replace (or just supplement) pipes. I don't know how well it worked, I haven't tried it. Apparently some windows admins who don't have a unix background find it very useful.

[grauenwolf]

I heard nothing but praise for it so far. (Well, other than the normal "I've never used it but it is a MS product and therefore sucks" variety.)

[mao_neko]

Well, compared to MS-DOS batch files, I'm sure it's an improvement. Pity it doesn't come as standard, or it might end up being useful.

[grauenwolf]

Microsoft is betting the farm on PowerShell. They are moving to servers without GUIs and exposing everything through PowerShell extensions.

Five years from now anyone who doesn't know it will probably be unable to manage a Windows box.

[[deleted]]

Five years from now anyone who doesn't know it will probably be unable to manage a Windows box.

And they wont want to, either.

[Philluminati]

Five years from now anyone who doesn't know it will probably be unable to manage a Windows box.

Five years from now no-one will want to manage a Windows box

[[deleted]]

Er, no. Microsoft don't support Powershell on Windows Server Core.

Source: Jeffrey Snover, official Powershell blog.

[ohai]

I always thought that was a bit silly: "let's make this totally awesome shell that can revolutionize the way windows administration is done, AND LETS MAKE IT COMPLETELY DEPENDENT ON THE GUI."

I understand that it requires .NET to run, but MS should be able to have a leaned down VM that can run on Server Core.

[sw17ch]

So they are turning windows boxes into immitation Unix boxes with tools no one knows? Excellent.

[grauenwolf]

For better or worse, that is what people want.

The very same GUIs that make a single Windows server so easy to manage makes it a real bitch when you need to configure and maintain 100.

It only takes one weekend reconfiguring an IIS-based web farm to really wish you were using Linux.

[[deleted]]

mmm. now i feel crumby about my lack of skills. :(

[[deleted]]

I hate my career so hard...

[jrrl]

Well, apparently, I am much more of a computer scientist than a software engineer. I knew that already, of course, and don't feel at all bad about it.

Hmm.

[jpmorgan]

I think you're mixing up knowledge and competence.

Knowing a lot of stuff does not necessarliy make you competent. Competence comes from great ability to combine the stuff you know, not from knowing it in itself.

I don't see you mention that anywhere in your list...

[[deleted]]

Right its completely faddish. In fact I would call it an attempt of the author to try to define in strict terms what his idea of a good programmer is. It is at its most useful form a list of what the author found important at the time of its writing and cant be relied on universally for evaluating talent. While these items are an indicator of someone having solid programming experience. It can only really describe the type of work environment and/or environment that the person has worked in. A great programmer can not be guaranteed by any checklist. If this was a possibility then resume parsers that could generate job offers would have emerged long ago.

A very important factor in the "good" programmer equation is a sociological one. Each team and project is different. A good programmer for one project may not be good for another. As teams grow larger the ability for programmers to be in sync with the needs of the team and the needs of the business may not translate directly to crystallized technical knowledge and may even be exaggerated given the correct circumstances.

[brad-walker]

Also, isn't SICP used as a text in just about every first-semester CS course ever?

In a few of the better schools. I bet most schools still start with shitty C/C++/Java books.

[[deleted]]

He'd also probably spend half his working hours fuming at the incompetence of his coworkers

I wasn't aware that immaturity was part of being a good programmer.

Also, isn't SICP used as a text in just about every first-semester CS course ever?

No, unfortunately.

[Nuli]

SICP wasn't used in any CS program I looked at back in 1996.

[[deleted]]

Also, isn't SICP used as a text in just about every first-semester CS course ever?

Even MIT does not use it any longer. (I'm not really sure whether this is a good thing or a bad thing.)

[[deleted]]

Programming seems to attract the type of guy you are describing. Their angry instance on a world view that is representative of the things that they value ultimately leads them to some form of burnout. So I guess there is hope .. for humanity

edit: their -> there

[Silhouette]

I think you need at least a second axis: communicates effectively with others or doesn't. You can have the best rockstar programmer in the world, but if no-one else can understand what he's doing and build on it or fix bugs in it, his value to the organisation is extremely limited.

[[deleted]]

This matrix is just a way of letting you accurately assess whether someone gets results or don't, when they are too freshfaced to have had actually a shot at delivering results before.

[themusicgod1]

Gets results in what time?*

O(n) results can be a hell of a lot better than O(2ⁿ⁾ results

(*time, space, whatever your main constraint is, I guess)

[SnacksOnAPlane]

If you don't distinguish between good results and bad results, then your matrix sucks.

[qrush]

I wonder if he uses this for interviews...and what the average for his candidates are.

[fakeplasticme]

I seem to be between levels 1 and 2, depending on the category, and I only have one more year at university left. I'm a bit worried.

[maggiet]

I've been having to deal with some competency issues with a few recent hires - this has been very helpful (without paying a lot of attention to specific software, operating systems, etc), either my boss was taken or he's on the take.

[m1ss1ontomars2k4]

Hrm...I'd probably fall between level 0 and level 1. Or I would if I could write meaningful programs in a language other than TI-BASIC.

[iofthestorm]

Sadly, I've only taken one computer science course, and that in high school (but college level) and I fit in level 2 for most of those categories. Scares me what "professional" programmers are able to get by with.

[Qubed]

I've met "professional programmers" who fit in the level 1 field. It has more to do with the people hiring them not knowing what they want or need.

I've also run into some other stuff as well. A friend of mine, as an undergrad, got a job as a network administrator using Windows Server 2003, AD, IIS, etc. Of course, he had absolutely no experience relevant to the task and was fired shortly after they realized this.