Infovark

I’ve got a bad case of “code head” at the moment. We’ve been working non-stop on our prototype for the last week, and after spending all that time in deep conversation with my computer I find it hard to communicate with ordinary people.

It’s hard to describe what programming feels like to someone who’s never written code. My best analogy is that it’s like trying to give instructions to your annoying kid brother, who happens to be a bit forgetful, somewhat hard of hearing, and very lazy. A typical conversation might go something like this:

You: Hey computer, I’d like you to add something for me.

Computer: Add what? I can’t add just anything.

You: I’d like you to add a number.

Computer: What number?

You: Five.

Computer: What about five?

You: Add five to something.

Computer: What do you mean something? What kind of something?

You: Add five to another number.

Computer: Which number?

You: Any number. It doesn’t matter. I’m creating a routine.

Computer: Oh. I see. You’ll want a variable, then.

You: Yeah, a variable. So I want you to add five to this variable–

Computer: Can we give it a name? I don’t remember things very well unless they have names.

You: Oh, OK. Call it x.

Computer: Call what x?

You: Call the variable x.

Computer: What kind of variable is it?

You: It’s a number. We’re going to add five to it.

Computer: Is it a big number?

You: [confused] I don’t know… No. No, it’s a small number, OK?

Computer: Does it have decimal points in it?

You: What does it matter?

Computer: I’m curious.

You: [slowly] No, it’s a very small number without decimal points. It’s an integer, OK?

Computer: What is?

You: The variable. The variable is an integer.

Computer: Which variable?

You: The one we were talking about before: x.

Computer: What about x?

You: [frustrated] Look, the variable called x is an integer, OK?

Computer: Oh, right. Gotcha.

You: OK, now I want you to add five to it.

Computer: Add five to what?

You: Add five to x.

Computer: You didn’t say, “Please.”

You: [angry] What? Why you little…

Computer: And I’m doing this in my own language, so you have to use “semicolon” for “please”.

You: [resigned] All right. Fine. Have it your way. Here you go: 5 + x;

Computer: OK.

You: Now if x is 20, what’s the answer?

Computer: What answer?

You: The answer to the question I asked!

Computer: Oh, you’ll want another variable for that.

You: Huh? Oh, fine… call the answer y. And before you ask, the variable y is an integer, too.

Computer: OK.

You: So, I’ve got an integer called x, which in this case happens to be 20.

Computer: OK.

You: Now add five to x.

Computer: OK.

You: Now what’s the value of y?

Computer: Zero.

You: [incredulous] What?

Computer: You didn’t assign a value to it.

You: I want y to be the answer!

Computer: The answer to what?

You: [exasperated] Look, y = 5 + x; OK? Have you got that?

Computer: Yes.

You: And in this case x is 20, which makes y…

Computer: 25.

This is the sort of dialog that occurs between the computer and the programmer all the time. Getting into the appropriate mindset to deal with a computer requires a lot of concentration. Programmers call this a state of flow, or being in the zone, where the programmer is able to think like a computer does, so that the conversation above never happens and instead the programmer just types the lines:


AddSomething()
{
int x, y;
x = 20;
y = 5 + x;
return y;
}


Sometimes it’s just as hard to get your mind out of a state of flow as well. That’s part of what makes working at a small software startup like infovark challenging. We have to toggle between pedantic, logical computer mode and natural, relativistic human mode. In one minute we can be thinking about strategic marketing campaigns and the next about how to explain to our idiot kid brother exactly how to do the next step in the task without him messing it up again.

In a way, it’s this frustration that drove Gordon and I to start infovark. We’ve seen far too much software that passes the frustration of being a programmer on to the end user, forcing non-programmers to go through painful, time-wasting conversations like the one above. Right now, we’re going through the tedious process of telling the computer exactly what should be done when so that our customers can get on with the important things in life.