> Oh, and one really mean observation that I'm afraid is too true to be omitted: idleness is the source of much trouble. A scientist has his science to worry about so he doesn't have time to complexify the code needlessly. Many programmers have no real substance in their work - the job is trivial - so they have too much time on their hands, which they use to dwell on "API design" and thus monstrosities are born.
Jesus, seriously? Can't tell if the author is just trolling flippantly in response to what may have been an unfair post...but ignoring the "programmers have no real substance in their work" thing...the OP mistakes thinks that "science" is all one needs to keep something on track. Uh, no. Just because someone thinks they know what they're doing scientifically doesn't mean they are good at examining or scrutinizing the way they work...which can include everything from the efficiency of data collection to the accuracy of such measurements. A good software engineer is not just fluff in such a situation.
Jesus, seriously? Can't tell if the author is just trolling flippantly in response to what may have been an unfair post...but ignoring the "programmers have no real substance in their work" thing...the OP mistakes thinks that "science" is all one needs to keep something on track. Uh, no. Just because someone thinks they know what they're doing scientifically doesn't mean they are good at examining or scrutinizing the way they work...which can include everything from the efficiency of data collection to the accuracy of such measurements. A good software engineer is not just fluff in such a situation.