optimus wrote:
On Wednesday 11 December 2002 02:36 pm, Elky Grrrr... wrote:
Yes indeed. Some of MS's programmers may be better, but open source programmers are the very best there is.
How'd you figure that? Be careful with generalizations you can't defend.
I am likely to believe that given the openness and intellectual challenge of programming in Linux, the best coders are Linux coders. These coders gravitate to Linux because of the open-source nature.Intellectual challenge? Have you ever tried making a useful (or even just interesting) Windows application?
With Linux, they have an open "toy" they can continuously assemble, reassemble, and improve. True learning comes from doing, and one cannot learn much using the closed, undocumented Win32 API and the absence of source code.Oh there's lots to learn, believe me. And besides, you don't use APIs to learn. You use them to create useful applications. That's what they're there for. At some point, you may have to bypass them to get useful work done, but that doesn't invalidate their usefulness.
Open source programmers are the best there is, for they have proven their technical skills with the best programmers from around the world.
Having seen some pretty bad open-source code in common use, I beg to differ.
Microsoft's programmers have to prove their technical skills only to their chief software architects and to Bill Gates, which only affords extremely limited peer review. Microsoft's coders are not programming gods. MS coders cannot dare pit their skills against thousands of open source programmers who pool their collective talents together to solve computing problems.They don't have to be programming gods. They do have to be pretty smart though -- it's tough to get into Microsoft. They don't have to "pit their skills against thousands of open source programmers". That's not their job.
As for open-source programmer gods, I don't think there's enough of them to go around to code-review each and every piece of open-source software floating around. Most open-source stuff is written by run-of-the mill programmers that just happen to be using Linux and decided to "scratch an itch."
> Imagine designing a program and the
whole world judges your work. You have to ensure that your code is the best there is, or suffer embarrasment and ridicule from other technically-capable ones who can point out flaws in your work.The point of open-source software is not to have the programming gods piss on you for writing less-than-perfect code. Bugs are accepted and fixed. And everyone, even the best open source programmers, occasionally writes code with bugs. A lot of open-source code goes out without proper testing and QA, on the assumption that people will be willing to help find them and possibly fix it themselves.
If you had been part of any significant software development effort, whether open-source or not, you would understand this.
If indeed you are very clever, and the program you designed is indeed innovative, the rest of the world will agree with you and validate your skills.Which is why Douglas Engelbart was such a hit and why we have so many great products from MIT's Media Lab. NOT.
What's even better is that the world helps you improve your work by honestly citing your flaws and recommends ways to better it. Do you think there is anything better than the opinion and suggestions of hundreds of programmers from all around the world?
I'd take the judgement of a user over a programmer any day.
That is true meritocracy, and only open source programmers earn that shining mark and approval.
So where's yours? Brian _ Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fully Searchable Archives With Friendly Web Interface at http://marc.free.net.ph To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
