[Pontus]

Just curious what you think of it

[supersloth]

after the hazing and debasement is finished.

[Amadeus]

Since the title is not bestowed by any governing body, it is extremely subjective.

To me, a programmer is someone who can successfully implement an application/web app that fulfills the requirements given. I suppose it means something else to others.

[Noldona]

I have always heard that a programmer is someone who does it for a living, a coder is someone who does it for a hobby. That is because a programmer has to deal with stuff that is not code like requirements documents, meetings, etc. While a coder can just work on the code without dealing with all that stuff.

[Amadeus]

I would agree that is what separates professionals from non-professionals, but would think that one could be a programmer without being paid for it...just not a professional one.

[WolfCoder]

I agree with the action of programming because "to program" is a verb. A programmer would merely be someone who programs. For example, I just finished the imgpacker.exe tool that takes .bmp files and creates a video memory pack file (WolfCoder's Image Pack .WIP) for use with point sprites, 2D images/sprites, and 3D textures. Because I wrote something, that makes me the programmer of said tool. Since it's my hobby, and sometimes I do it for work (someone wanted a quick tool to convert electron microscope data to an Excel spreadsheet so they don't have to do it by hand, they haven't contacted me or my supervisor but if they did I would make it as part of my computer assistant job) it makes me a programmer. Being a programmer does not imply you are a good one (ex: Windows 98).

This post has been edited by WolfCoder: 20 October 2008 - 02:33 PM

[supersloth]

when they start dressing like furries and having pretend interest in a mixture of a foreign language and internet lingo.

[WolfCoder]

Gyuu~ I only act like my namesake a little bit, and I have to declare a minor as part of my degree since I chose Computer Science as my major, and because I'm doing so well it seems Japanese might be my minor. Knowing east Asian languages appears to be of some use in the fields of Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, and like engineering fields. I wound up studying Japanese nearly as much as I study programming, so it's always great to find a cheap hobby that I have a great passion for.

[capty99]

supersloth, on 20 Oct, 2008 - 04:36 PM, said:

when they start dressing like furries and having pretend interest in a mixture of a foreign language and internet lingo.

i browse topics only for your posts.

[OliveOyl3471]

You're not really a programmer until you have 2147483647 Dream Kudos.

[Noldona]

Honestly, I just said that is the definition I have heard not what I believe. I would personally call anyone who programs professionally and non-professionally a programmer. But, to play devil's advocate (one of my favorite games) I will go with previously stated definitions.

Yes, by programming something you become a programmer. Coding something makes you a coder. So the real question is what is the difference between programming and coding.

One could argue the the act of programming requires actually following a programming method (i.e. the waterfall method), doing the paperwork that comes along with said method including but not limited to requirements doc, design doc and test scripts, and following said documents for development. All of this lends to an actually CMMI process which a programmer follows. To program a piece of software, these things must be in place. In short, programmers are required to know other parts of the process then just code.

This is comparison to coding which only requires an idea be formed and the coder sitting down and coding for said idea. They have no specific methodology to follow nor firmed requirements. The lack of specific requirements and methodology does not lend to a CMMI process thus making this coding instead of programming. In short, coders only have to know the code.

[Amadeus]

And what if your documentation is developed elsewhere - the requirements by a business analyst, the , the design by an architect or software engineer, the testing designed and completed based of the requirements by a third party test team (this is an extremely common model in the industry). The programming resource is responsible only for implementing the design as given to them. Do you have a coder or a programmer? this individual only really needs to know code (and is therefore a coder as defined above), but the idea has been defined, the paperwork developed, and the test plan put together - none done by the programming resource.

[William_Wilson]

Amadeus, on 20 Oct, 2008 - 01:37 PM, said:

Since the title is not bestowed by any governing body, it is extremely subjective.

To me, a programmer is someone who can successfully implement an application/web app that fulfills the requirements given. I suppose it means something else to others.

This is pretty much what I was thinking when I read the topic description.

There are of course limits. Completing a high school computer course technically fills this, but it does not necessarily make you a programmer, it does however give you the first step in becoming one. I would say that, at the point where you can convince a group of people who considers themselves programmers that you are competent in a language then you can consider yourself a programmer. Either through paid position, forum, open source projects, etc.

[baavgai]

Noldona, on 21 Oct, 2008 - 09:04 AM, said:

One could argue the the act of programming requires actually following a programming method (i.e. the waterfall method), doing the paperwork that comes along with said method including but not limited to requirements doc, design doc and test scripts, and following said documents for development. All of this lends to an actually CMMI process which a programmer follows. To program a piece of software, these things must be in place. In short, programmers are required to know other parts of the process then just code.

No.

Project documentation is not something you waste to time of someone who is a good programmer. Truly good programmers are difficult to find. You don't distract them with process garbage if you can help it.

The method of user docs, meetings, user story time, budgets, release cycles, help desk, issue tracking, and all the other trivia that make non programmers feel they are in the loop is the unpleasant job of the Project Manager. It is the job of the project manager to shield the programmer from the drama that can surround a project and allow them to actually do their job as efficiently as possible, which is to focus on programming.

Trying to take the process that surrounds producing the final product and calling that programming is misleading. It's like calling an editor the author of a book. The editor is a required part of the process without which we wouldn't see the book, but they don't write.

I've done both jobs. In general, anyone with "Manager" in their title will get higher pay, regardless of the amount of work they do. Personally, actual code is more rewarding and they can keep the cash.

I define programmer as someone who can write a computer program on their own without hand holding and fully understand what they've done. More programs and larger projects will further cement the legitimacy of the claim; one program does not a programmer make. Further, a "professional" programmer is merely one who gets paid for doing it.

[Noldona]

I will admit that the documentation is much better done by someone else, but that doesn't stop a programmer from having to know about how it works. In some cases, it is preferable that the programmer does the documentation so they fully understand what needs to be done and design it in a way that will work efficiently. Then again my view of "the industry" is a little skewed because I have only programed professionally in the military.