Re: Initiative or otherwise?

[dws]

Let's bring scenario one closer to home by changing

Sits down at his workstation, hits Google a searches for something that fits the spec. Finds something close, downloads the source. Opens the source, tidies up the layout. Adjusts a few comments. removes some bits that are redundant, adds a few bits that are missing. Refines a few bits that don't work the way he thinks they should.

to

Sits down at his workstation, searches CPAN for a package that implements the spec. Finds something close, downloads it. Adds wrapper to subclass the package to add a few bits and refine a few others that don't work they way he thinks they should.

Did programmer B do a better job than programer A? In terms of how well tested the result is, probably yes. Programmer A won't have had time to fully debug one day's worth of work, while programmer B is leveraging a tested module, leaving him/herself more time to test the result.

Did you think Programmer B showed initiative but that Child B cheated?

As phrased, yes. But this is a trick question. A school assignment is not the same thing as a professional assignment. People who can't tell the difference make a lot of extra work for themselves.

[Anonymous Monk]

Let's not redefine things that way.

Programmer B is described acting like legions of people who needed something, found a starting point on Matt's Script Archive, and proceeded from there. My guess is that their average output has the same quality as most people who think that cheating is OK. I have similar opinions of both groups...

[Aristotle]

I definitely agree.

I have to caution that we do not have enough information to make an informed call on the skills of programmer B - neither as far as his abilities as a programmer are concerned nor about his ability to judge the quality of the downloaded code. Nor do we know how critical the task was and how acceptable a sloppily coded solution might be in this case.

But I feel that in practice, people who take this approach are cargo cultists far, far more often than not.

Not reinventing wheels is a good mindset, but it requires being able to tell round wheels apart from square ones. Many people quite simply lack the experience and expertise to do so. That is why places like the CPAN are so important.

Generally, scenario one is much harder to judge than scenario two, irrespective of the fact which has already been pointed out that the goals differ.

Makeshifts last the longest.

[Anonymous Monk]

We may not make an informed statement on the abilities of programmer B, but we know enough to make an informed guess.

Programmer B's method of development was cut and paste, followed by light editing. People who routinely develop this way are generally not very good. Good developers engage in code reuse by modularizing and then reusing modular chunks.

This is why I object to dws's rewrite. It changes the evidence of programmer B's development methodology significantly for the better. It also eliminates the common element of starting with someone else's work and presenting the result as your own.