Skip to main content

Programming: It's about how interested you are.

Had this tweet show up in my feed this morning and I think it's worth an explicit mention.  Eric Evans talks a bit about Domain Driven Design, a topic he's also not coincidentally published a book on many years ago:
Something I've been encountering in my travels as a developer and leader of developers is the varying levels of motivation, confidence and enthusiasm my peers conduct themselves with.  At one point during his talk, Eric speaks about how a hypothetical carpenter spends more time talking about his output than he does how he might use any particular tool.
Eric also - in my opinion - correctly highlights that the best people in the industry tend to be master technologists.  They constantly have their head in the space and are naturally disposed to aspects of technology and how they work together.

Eric's talk covers a lot of different areas as he works his way around and into various definitions of DDD, but this one bit really resonated with me.
When I was younger, the point it became clear that computers and more specifically software were in my future was when I developed a healthy obsession with it.  I've worked - specifically in the past - with so many people who treat the programs they make as just a way to a paycheque.  Without casting any negativity towards wanting to earn a living, I feel like there's something self-defeating to being a software developer and treating it like something rote or mundane.

Last year I was invited by the NRC to help participate in coming up with ideas for a curriculum for students learning to be developers.  One thing many of us on the panel agreed on was that you have to be innately interested.
For a room full of leaders from different companies that don't work together to say the same thing, there has to be a mote of truth to the notion!

Enjoy the video and I hope you're encouraged to start working on having a healthy obsession too!

Popular posts from this blog

Making TypeScript npm Packages

If you've landed here, I can only assume you're like me and see packages as the highest form of sophistication in software development.  In that same vein, I bet at some point in the past you've wished you could start applying DRY principles to your client-side efforts.  I know for myself, I don't enjoy writing the same application bootstrap code constantly and so recently, I was motivated to codify it.

This body of understanding has taken me quite some while to figure out, hopefully what I share here is helpful enough to get you up to speed.  No post is complete without some kind of example, so throughout I'm going to reference a package I've just finished putting together called protoculture.

Briefly described, protoculture encapsulates all the common bootstrap and conventions I've been using while developing TypeScript apps that use React and Redux.  Honestly, I've already gotten a lot of benefit out of putting this package together, but nothing about…

Building .NET Core Nuget Packages

My last blog post was on building and publishing npm packages, specifically for typescript projects. In my opinion, packages are an important fundamental unit in software development. They sit at the confluence of technical competence and collaboration, and represent something the software community should be proud of.
Most of the time, you're going to be creating software packages once you're comfortable with some essential pillars: CodingProject structureSoftware architectureBuildingDeliveryCommunityLicensing
After I got my npm package up and running, my next task was to do the same thing with my C# libraries. Similar to protoculture, I have made a library called praxis.  This is done by leveraging the services and tooling known in the .NET ecosystem as nuget.


In this case, praxis abstracts many of the concepts and functionality I require when producing server projects. It builds on top of ASP.NET Core, so in that sense you can almost think of it as a framework-framework. The…

Laravel Project Architecture: The Missing Guide

At my job, we've been doing a lot of learning and development using Taylor Otwell's Laravel 4 PHP framework.  As we've become more familiar with it, we've had to come up with better ways to structure our projects outside of what the documentation indicates and the default distribution that is provided.

If you've been working with Laravel 4 for any amount of time or come with experience from another framework and are just getting started, you've probably noticed that there are a lot of different ways to cut up your projects.


Choice is nice, but sometimes it can be paralysing or misleading. Concrete Advice This post is done in such a way that you can just skim the headings, but if you want a detailed explanation in each section, feel free to read in where necessary.

While I can't say the entirety of my advice is in practice throughout the community, I can say that we are starting to use it, and to very good effect at my job.  Especially considering that our a…