Software engineering and independence

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenges faced by individuals in software engineering who prefer independent and unconventional problem-solving methods. Participants explore the balance between autonomy and adherence to established guidelines in the field of software development.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses a preference for independent thinking and questions whether the software engineering field would be difficult for someone who values autonomy.
  • Another participant argues that while autonomy is possible when working alone, collaboration requires adherence to guidelines for the sake of clarity and teamwork.
  • A different viewpoint suggests that constructive arguments can be made for unconventional methods, but one must be open to feedback and the expertise of others.
  • One participant emphasizes that successful software projects are typically highly structured, implying that disregarding authority may lead to negative career outcomes.
  • Another comment highlights the potential pitfalls of claiming a unique approach if it results in incomprehensible code, warning that such a mindset could lead to significant challenges in the field.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of following guidelines in software engineering. Some advocate for the importance of structure and collaboration, while others emphasize the value of independent thinking and unconventional approaches. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the balance between autonomy and adherence to established practices.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexities of teamwork and the potential consequences of disregarding established coding practices. There are references to the importance of communication and understanding within collaborative environments, but no consensus on how to navigate these challenges effectively.

CyberShot
Messages
133
Reaction score
2
I tend to think very independently, often coming up with unconventional, sometimes unorthodox, ways of solving problems. I do not like to listen to authority such as having to code up software a certain way or following strict guidelines/formats.


Do you think the software engineering/development field would be very tough for someone like me who prefers autonomy? If not, what fields of computer science do allow for that?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
CyberShot said:
following strict guidelines/formats.
If you work only by yourself (extremely unlikely) you can do it anyway you want. If you work for/with someone else, you'll have to follow the guidelines. Other people must be able to understand what you wrote. It's not a matter of authority, really. View it as simple politeness to others.

I'd say just learn to deal with it. You still have autonomy, but writing something that is completely incomprehensible to everyone else is not useful at all. What if you leave a project? Nobody will be able to take over.

This is going to be true for any field, btw.
 
CyberShot said:
I tend to think very independently, often coming up with unconventional, sometimes unorthodox, ways of solving problems. I do not like to listen to authority such as having to code up software a certain way or following strict guidelines/formats.


Do you think the software engineering/development field would be very tough for someone like me who prefers autonomy? If not, what fields of computer science do allow for that?

If you are working in a team, you have to tone down the ego. My view is this:

If you have a better way of doing something and can constructively provide an argument why this is so, and your counterpart can not refute the argument then go ahead. If however they point out something that refutes your idea, then take on board what they said.

If someone has been doing something for many years and you haven't, chances are they will know more than you. As long as you are comfortable with this "law of averages" and willing to become better by listening to your peers, then I see no problem.

Sometimes your "expert" will get it wrong, and if you end up in this situation where they don't accept their shortcomings and act like an *******, then things like "office politics" may come into your decision (and unfortunately this kind of thing happens a lot).

People that see their shortcomings and act constructively to patch them up in my book command a lot of respect and subsequently earn it.
 
Most successful large software projects are now done in a very highly structured fashion, so "not listening to authority such as having to code up software a certain way or following strict guidelines/formats." will get you nowhere, except unemployed.
 
caffenta said:
If you work only by yourself (extremely unlikely) you can do it anyway you want.
chiro said:
If you have a better way of doing something and can constructively provide an argument why this is so, and your counterpart can not refute the argument then go ahead.
My understanding from another topic that he made is that "coming up with unconventional, sometimes unorthodox, ways of solving problems" means "my approach is so unconventional no compiler understands me".

So as people have already mentioned in that other thread, if you're going to keep telling yourself it's just that you have a different "approach", then you're going to be in a world of trouble very soon.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
23
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K