Writer versus Constructor

What’s the favorite toy from your childhood? For me, both my sisters and pretty much everyone I know that would be Lego. If you could only afford it (and in the times when I was a kid, that wasn’t so easy in the post-soviet Poland), there was no greater fun, than the joy of unlimited freedom to create whatever you can only imagine. And the fact, that you had limited resources wasn’t a real obstacle. It was a challenge.

Nearly all the programmers I know, fell in love with programming because of the same reason. To be able to put pure ideas to life, to create something meaningful out of nothing. Truth is, no other matter is so flexible, as the stuff we work with.

We are developers because we love to construct things that work. To give soul to the machine. To make it act on our behalf. It’s like magic.

That’s why it is so difficult for us to understand, that a real software craftsman is a writer, not a constructor.

Uncle Bob is talking about it at the beginning of “Clean Code”. When you are writing code, you are actually reading a lot more. How is that possible? Let’s have a look at an example: you have a project going, and you take a new feature from the Scrum/Kanban wall of features. And you:

  1. read the code to find a place where putting some more code will give you the result you seek
  2. read the code to better understand the surroundings, to eliminate potential side effects of your changes
  3. write the test and the code that does what the feature is expected to do

You can start with an acceptance test first, but that only changes the order, not the fact, that the proportions of reading to writing, are always in favor of reading. Big time.

So, if reading takes so much time, how important is to make things readable?

People are working hard to learn how to write faster, how not to use mouse in their IDE, they memorize all the keyboard shortcuts, use templates and so on, but the speed up is not significant in real work. Why? Because we are only writing code 1/10 of our time. The rest is spent on reading and thinking.

A good craftsman is a good writer, because he makes the code readable, easy to grasp, easy to understand. There is a huge shift in mentality, between a constructor and a writer. Above all, the constructor’s goal is to make things work. The writer’s goal, on the other hand, is to make things easy to understand.

The question is, who are we writing code for? The computer? Hell no. If that was true, we would be still writing in an assembly language (or maybe even in a machine code). The whole point of procedural, functional, object oriented languages was to make it easier for us to understand the code. And that’s because we don’t write the code for the computer.

We write it for other programmers.

To make the shift in mentality easier, let mi show you the differences in mindsets, between the constructor and the writer.


The Constructor

The constructor is in love with technology for the sake of technology. He likes to “technologically masturbate” himself with new toys. He thinks that simplicity is for pussies, the real thing is always complex. He never removes anything, always adds more. He doesn’t care that he cannot understand how his earlier solutions work, if they work why would he want to change them? He creates monsters like EJB1/2, that can do pretty much everything, but nobody is able to handle them. The he writes software to be able to use/confgure the software he has written before, because it’s already too complex for anybody (maybe except for him) to understand how to use it directly.

A bigger framework is a solution to his every problem. And even if it’s a new problem, he tries to modify his beloved one-to-rule-them-all tool, to be able to solve it. He is dreaming about the day, that he will have a single, big, multipurpose, futuristic wrench that works as if by magic, and does everything, from printing log files to saving the planet.

The constructor works best alone. He gets angry at people that cannot understand his programs in a second. When he works with other programmers, he is always afraid, he doesn’t like others to play with his tools. When they try to do pretty much anything, they always blow something else up. Because of unforeseen side effects, a small change can devastate days of work. And it happens a lot. It gets messy, so he hates to work with others.

The Writer

The writer reads a lot, so he wants to make his code as readable, as simple as possible. He learns stuff like DSLs, patterns, eXtreme Programming, to make things easy. Easy is his keyword. He cares less about frameworks. He usually knows a few languages from different worlds, because he believes there is no single silver bullet, and different solutions are better for different problems. His code has few comments, because it doesn’t need them. His code is self-documenting. His code is expressive. His code is simple, simplicity is his main value. Brilliant things are simple.

The writer always thinks about his reader. He walks hand to hand with his readers. He guides them, he cares for them. He never leaves them in the dark. His skills are in communication: he wants his intentions to be understood.

The writer works like a sniper. His changes (whether bug fixes or new features) are minimal, but the effects are exactly as expected. He never does Shotgun Surgery. He doesn’t violate DRY. He is a precise man and he works with a scalpel. His code is side-effect free, simple and readable, so he knows where and how to hit. He knows what the effects will be. He keeps accidental complexity low.

The writer is agile. He doesn’t set up traps, and he doesn’t fall into traps. He works hard to master basic skills. He believes that without those basic skills, no framework can save him anyway.

The writer likes to work with other programmers. He is using pair programming and code reviews to make sure that his code is easy to understand by others. He wants to have another mind watching his back, and catching him when he falls. He is supportive, he is friendly. He understands that no man is an island, and that the quality of his work will be measured by the number of WTFs shouted by other developers.

A good craftsman is a good writer.

And you know what one of the most successful writers of recent times, Stephen King, says?

That he’s only a craftsman.

PS: all the pictures are from Fallout games.

PS2: I’ve failed at giving appropriate credits to the author of the concept of programmer as a constructor. Let me fix that right away: the source of the idea that a programmer as a writer has opposition in programmer-constructor comes from a post by Andrzej Szczodrak that you can find in here

You May Also Like

How to automate tests with Groovy 2.0, Spock and Gradle

This is the launch of the 1st blog in my life, so cheers and have a nice reading!

y u no test?

Couple of years ago I wasn't a big fan of unit testing. It was obvious to me that well prepared unit tests are crucial though. I didn't known why exactly crucial yet then. I just felt they are important. My disliking to write automation tests was mostly related to the effort necessary to prepare them. Also a spaghetti code was easily spotted in test sources.

Some goodies at hand

Now I know! Test are crucial to get a better design and a confidence. Confidence to improve without a hesitation. Moreover, now I have the tool to make test automation easy as Sunday morning... I'm talking about the Spock Framework. If you got here probably already know what the Spock is, so I won't introduce it. Enough to say that Spock is an awesome unit testing tool which, thanks to Groovy AST Transformation, simplifies creation of tests greatly.

An obstacle

The point is, since a new major version of Groovy has been released (2.0), there is no matching version of Spock available yet.

What now?

Well, in a matter of fact there is such a version. It's still under development though. It can be obtained from this Maven repository. We can of course use the Maven to build a project and run tests. But why not to go even more "groovy" way? XML is not for humans, is it? Lets use Gradle.

The build file

Update: at the end of the post is updated version of the build file.
apply plugin: 'groovy'
apply plugin: 'idea'

def langLevel = 1.7

sourceCompatibility = langLevel
targetCompatibility = langLevel

group = 'com.tamashumi.example.testwithspock'
version = '0.1'

repositories {
mavenLocal()
mavenCentral()
maven { url 'http://oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/snapshots/' }
}

dependencies {
groovy 'org.codehaus.groovy:groovy-all:2.0.1'
testCompile 'org.spockframework:spock-core:0.7-groovy-2.0-SNAPSHOT'
}

idea {
project {
jdkName = langLevel
languageLevel = langLevel
}
}
As you can see the build.gradle file is almost self-explanatory. Groovy plugin is applied to compile groovy code. It needs groovy-all.jar - declared in version 2.0 at dependencies block just next to Spock in version 0.7. What's most important, mentioned Maven repository URL is added at repositories block.

Project structure and execution

Gradle's default project directory structure is similar to Maven's one. Unfortunately there is no 'create project' task and you have to create it by hand. It's not a big obstacle though. The structure you will create will more or less look as follows:
<project root>

├── build.gradle
└── src
├── main
│ ├── groovy
└── test
└── groovy
To build a project now you can type command gradle build or gradle test to only run tests.

How about Java?

You can test native Java code with Spock. Just add src/main/java directory and a following line to the build.gradle:
apply plugin: 'java'
This way if you don't want or just can't deploy Groovy compiled stuff into your production JVM for any reason, still whole goodness of testing with Spock and Groovy is at your hand.

A silly-simple example

Just to show that it works, here you go with a basic example.

Java simple example class:

public class SimpleJavaClass {

public int sumAll(int... args) {

int sum = 0;

for (int arg : args){
sum += arg;
}

return sum;
}
}

Groovy simple example class:

class SimpleGroovyClass {

String concatenateAll(char separator, String... args) {

args.join(separator as String)
}
}

The test, uhm... I mean the Specification:

class JustASpecification extends Specification {

@Unroll('Sums integers #integers into: #expectedResult')
def "Can sum different amount of integers"() {

given:
def instance = new SimpleJavaClass()

when:
def result = instance.sumAll(* integers)

then:
result == expectedResult

where:
expectedResult | integers
11 | [3, 3, 5]
8 | [3, 5]
254 | [2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128]
22 | [7, 5, 6, 2, 2]
}

@Unroll('Concatenates strings #strings with separator "#separator" into: #expectedResult')
def "Can concatenate different amount of integers with a specified separator"() {

given:
def instance = new SimpleGroovyClass()

when:
def result = instance.concatenateAll(separator, * strings)

then:
result == expectedResult

where:
expectedResult | separator | strings
'Whasup dude?' | ' ' as char | ['Whasup', 'dude?']
'2012/09/15' | '/' as char | ['2012', '09', '15']
'nice-to-meet-you' | '-' as char | ['nice', 'to', 'meet', 'you']
}
}
To run tests with Gradle simply execute command gradle test. Test reports can be found at <project root>/build/reports/tests/index.html and look kind a like this.


Please note that, thanks to @Unroll annotation, test is executed once per each parameters row in the 'table' at specification's where: block. This isn't a Java label, but a AST transformation magic.

IDE integration

Gradle's plugin for Iintellij Idea

I've added also Intellij Idea plugin for IDE project generation and some configuration for it (IDE's JDK name). To generate Idea's project files just run command: gradle idea There are available Eclipse and Netbeans plugins too, however I haven't tested them. Idea's one works well.

Intellij Idea's plugins for Gradle

Idea itself has a light Gradle support built-in on its own. To not get confused: Gradle has plugin for Idea and Idea has plugin for Gradle. To get even more 'pluginated', there is also JetGradle plugin within Idea. However I haven't found good reason for it's existence - well, maybe excluding one. It shows dependency tree. There is a bug though - JetGradle work's fine only for lang level 1.6. Strangely all the plugins together do not conflict each other. They even give complementary, quite useful tool set.

Running tests under IDE

Jest to add something sweet this is how Specification looks when run with jUnit  runner under Intellij Idea (right mouse button on JustASpecification class or whole folder of specification extending classes and select "Run ...". You'll see a nice view like this.

Building web application

If you need to build Java web application and bundle it as war archive just add plugin by typing the line
apply plugin: 'war'
in the build.gradle file and create a directory src/main/webapp.

Want to know more?

If you haven't heard about Spock or Gradle before or just curious, check the following links:

What next?

The last thing left is to write the real production code you are about to test. No matter will it be Groovy or Java, I leave this to your need and invention. Of course, you are welcome to post a comments here. I'll answer or even write some more posts about the subject.

Important update

Spock version 0.7 has been released, so the above build file doesn't work anymore. It's easy to fix it though. Just remove last dash and a word SNAPSHOT from Spock dependency declaration. Other important thing is that now spock-core depends on groovy-all-2.0.5, so to avoid dependency conflict groovy dependency should be changed from version 2.0.1 to 2.0.5.
Besides oss.sonata.org snapshots maven repository can be removed. No obstacles any more and the build file now looks as follows:
apply plugin: 'groovy'
apply plugin: 'idea'

def langLevel = 1.7

sourceCompatibility = langLevel
targetCompatibility = langLevel

group = 'com.tamashumi.example.testwithspock'
version = '0.1'

repositories {
mavenLocal()
mavenCentral()
}

dependencies {
groovy 'org.codehaus.groovy:groovy-all:2.0.5'
testCompile 'org.spockframework:spock-core:0.7-groovy-2.0'
}

idea {
project {
jdkName = langLevel
languageLevel = langLevel
}
}

Sonar Gerrit Plugin Release

I am happy to announce a first release of my Sonar Gerrit plugin. This plugin reports Sonar violations on your patchsets to your Gerrit server. Sonar analyses full project, but only files included in patchset are commented on Gerrit. Please forward to project page for installation instructions. This plugin is intended to use with Gerrit Trigger plugin for Jenkins CI server. Together they provide a great tool for automatic static code analysis.I am happy to announce a first release of my Sonar Gerrit plugin. This plugin reports Sonar violations on your patchsets to your Gerrit server. Sonar analyses full project, but only files included in patchset are commented on Gerrit. Please forward to project page for installation instructions. This plugin is intended to use with Gerrit Trigger plugin for Jenkins CI server. Together they provide a great tool for automatic static code analysis.