Link Details

passion and good programming are not mutually exclusive. the idea that they are antithetical is rubbish.

enjoyment of life or the desire to be properly compensated is not a sign of either passion or a lack there of.

As a senior developer I sit in quite often on interviews, and very often the people coming don't code outside work, didn't code before learning it in school and just want to show that they can learn quickly, but could probably just as well learn gardening quickly. That means they're not passionate about it.

To be passionate about art or music doesn't mean that you should pass out on making money or neglecting your family. The same applies to coding. And I haven't yet met a person who is a good coder who _isn't_ passionate about it.
,

As I've just said in the comments on my post:
Any and Every programmer out there has days when they wake up and all they want to do is program, because they have an idea in their head and want to go code it up. The problem is that the next day, maybe all you want to do is go off and play computer games or go for a picnic or veg out in front of the idiot box. The good programmers are professional enough to get through that and push their projects forward even when they’re not in the mood to do so. And if you think that the really great programming success stories were only done on days when their creators felt in the mood, you’re incorrect.

The point wasn’t about those wonderful high days that we all get, when going to work is a joy and everything’s great - it’s about all the days, good and bad. The good programmers, the mythical 20%, work through all those days. They’re not dependant on waking up in a good mood to get good work done.



In other words, passion is a short-term thing. Good programming requires people who are in it for the long haul and who aren't dependant on that good mood we all get every so often. And, cynic that I've become, I'm sick of many job ads out there looking for the rock star programmer who's bursting with passion for coding - because it's become code (at least in Ireland) for "we have no idea of the job spec, but we want to hire a new graduate, pay them peanuts, work them like dogs, and fire them at the end of the probation period". I've seen it happen to several people, I even had it happen to me a few years ago, and I'm rather opposed to the practise. So I'd like a more professional approach, thanks. Less drama and hyperbole, more actual coding.

I fully agree to what you're saying, especially the cynical hiring practices. But recruiting semantics and having to work even when you don't feel like like it, seeing things through et.c. are not what I'm talking about (OK, writing).

There really exist people why are passionate about programming, in a very train-spotting way. You just can't help yourself and it seems like the most fun, rewarding and natural thing to do. I am one. When I get home (after making dinner, tucking the kids in with a book, et.c.) is to sit and work on my own pet projects. Because I can think of nothing more rewarding to do.

Think about it this way; Would you rather let your car be repaired by a repair-man who just repair cars for the money and starts coding when he gets home as a hobby, or would you like the car-loving, motor-tweaking, self-taught mechanical engineer to do it, and who does it _just_right_ because he really cares about it.

That cynical people take advantage of people who're passionate and that even passionate people can be hard to motivate and be just as bad people (in general) as any other person is no reason to clank down on passion, in any area.

So passion for a subject is a long-term thing, something a person has, like an ear or a nose. ,

I think that may be bringing it down to the level of semantics. "Long term passion" is rather a contradiction in terms. Long term interest, yes, I can get behind that - but it's not what I was talking about.

Perhaps an historical analogy? Passionate programmers are often (not always - just every time I've met one in the last fifteen years or so) Leonardo da Vinci characters. Way ahead of their time. Magnificent ideas. Always experimenting. And they're like da Vinci in one other respect as well - the projects they see through to completion tend to be the exceptions rather than the rule. Remember, most of da Vinci's great ideas were just that - ideas. Nothing actually built or working. A simply *magnificent* mind - but also famous for having all the sticking power of a buttered cat.

Edison, on the other hand, would be an analogy for a good professional programmer. He did not believe in giant leaps forward. He invented (or more accurately, he caused to be invented) more things than virtually anyone else in US history but not by giant leaps - by creating through consistent hard work an environment in which daily small leaps were made (which added up to become larger leaps). In fact, to call him an inventor is really to skip the most important part of how Edison did things - he developed ideas, rather than inventing them. A developer - which is a rather roundabout, but apt, pun....