Three more books to add to my reading list... only just after i've managed to knock two off!

But I don't quite see why not knowing any of those names would be a handicap - while sometimes a person is identified with a technology (Gates/Windows, Stroustrup/C++, Berners-Lee/HTML) - I don't really see why that should be for all cases... I use the technology I use because that technology is useful to the task, not because it has a person's name attached to it.

Still, I agree that it is interesting (and inspiring and motiviating and insightful) to read about the motivations for decisions made by the people behind the technology, which is I now want to read these titles (but again, I would tend to remember the motivations and discussions rather than the names involved).

"If the next programmer you interview can't identify at least one of the programmers interviewed in Coders at Work and tell you roughly what they're famous for …
… I'd say that's an immediate no-hire. "

WHAT THE F***?

One? Your threshold is one?

Please delete this comment, just testing captcha ("balks" and "59 1/2" where 1/2 is a single character???)

@Sembi - I second that. What a moronic statement. What about if they don't know C/C++ like you Jeff? Because you don't need to know it? do you need to know about a bunch of programmers that were famous 20 years ago? I bet you don't need that either.

I can't identify at least one of the programmers and I am coding for over 20 years by now.

I agree with the others. A bit silly Jeff that you'd no-hire someone because they don't know who someone is. Surely, what they've actually done is more important?

Personally I admire Douglas Crockford a lot because I think he has a lot of good thoughts and insights. And he has made me respect Yahoo more as a company than before.

It has been my experience that people who read books like this are an immediate no-hire. They're the one who have time to read books about programming in their free time, but never actually program in their free time. The worst programmers we've hired have the largest programming book collections.

Perhaps I'm in an odd part of the industry. I've also found that having a CS degree correlates strongly with no-hire as well. Our best hires have been those who've had to write a lot of software in the pursuit of some unrelated degree.

Come on guys, it isn't that hard. I can recognize 6 of them and I'm a shithead. Who doesn't know who the creator of the C programming language is? The creator of Java? the creator of Javascript?

You've never seen a copy of K&R? (do you know what K&R is?)

These aren't obscure people guys, you'd have to live in a shed and spend your whole life programming basic to have not heard of any of them.

Thank God I recognized Donald Knuth :)))))

"If the next programmer you interview can't identify at least one of the programmers interviewed in Coders at Work and tell you roughly what they're famous for …
… I'd say that's an immediate no-hire. "

That is probably the single stupidest thing I've heard you say. Granted, you're normally pretty much right about this stuff, but that is an elitist statement the likes of which I would expect from the main characters in High Fidelity (by Nick Hornby)

What if finding out about programmers doesn't interest me? What if I prefer to find out about computing history and could tell you all about Alan Turing and Bletchley Park?

You, Sir, have made me sad :-(

Hey Now Jeff,

Thx, I sure have learned so much about other great coders from your blog & SO.

Coding Horror Fan,

Catoo

I recognise most of the names, and could tell you a bit about five or six of them (I've even met a few), so I'm safe to apply for a role with Jeff ;-)

I think if you read Jeff's statement as *he* wouldn't hire anyone that didn't know at least one of the names it doesn't sound so silly. After all, when you hire someone there has to be some common ground in the way you think about things and approach problems.
If you have all these influences and you hire someone that knows none of them, and seems uninterested in them, that can be a source of friction - even if the person you are hiring is perfectly competent and would be fine in a different team.

Sorry but this is just ridiculous. Do you need to know who invented the wheel to work in the automobile industry? Or who invented bottle openers to work in a restaurant?

I agree with a lot of stuff you say, but not this time.

Jeff is hiring only programming groupies.

K&R = Brian Kernighan and Dennis Ritchie
- neither of whom are on the list of interviews...

I once worked with duct tape programmers, on project that had to be shipped on a regular basis, and I hated it. There was no design, no architecture, everything was just extended to cover new features, and we had to solve problems that wouldn't exist if we had it done right from the beginning.
Then I read how Jeff and Joel get excited about duct tape programmer Jamie Zawinski from Netscape.
How they just ship the code, and don't care about anything fancy like COM or CORBA or design patterns.
The problem is, their duct tape code eventually became a giant mudball which they decided to throw away and REWRITE EVERYTHING.
And it was the end of Netscape. The N6 (gecko) was huge and slow. N7 and later, less significant versions were a ripoff of Mozilla's Firesomething, with features that weren't used by anyone. Hello?

I don't know any of those guys :-(

That's it... I'm signing my resignation. There's no point in me working in this profession.

Mr Atwood engaging with his keyboard before thinking again. So sad.
I am reading this book at the moment. I'm on page 270, Simon Peyton Jones.

A fascinating read. Reminds of the book Dreaming in Code by Scott Rosenberg.

If I remember correctly the interviewees are asked what makes for a good programmer to be considered for a job with them; none have answered that an essential criterion is to name a supposedly well-known programmer/coder/software engineer/computer scientist et al.

More than one mentions that puzzle and coding tests are not useful to them in assessing a person's suitability for programming. That was a surprise.

I've just finished the second chapter and I am really impressed. There's some good stuff in this book. Thanks to both of you for exposing us to its existence.

Lot of comments from people who feel insulted in their profession, it seems. Don't take it so seriously, guys, it's only Jeff Atwood's opinion we're talking about. :-)

Personally, I know Steele, Knuth, Thompson and Zawinski (well, not personally). And of these, I only know Knuth on a level beyond his works, and Zawinski only because of his personality (and the infamous regex quote). Steele and Thompson I only know as "the creators of". The other names mean nothing to me.

I think whether or not you know programmers by name can be pretty random. For example, turns out Brendan Eich created Javascript. When I read this it triggers an "oh yeah, I've seen his name once" response for me, but I certainly wouldn't know Brendan Eich from Adam if I met him, nor do I have any idea what his views on programming are, even though I'm quite familiar with Javascript. This is simply because my work may involve Javascript, but it will not involve knowing the mind of the guy who created it, nor do I feel this is particularly important. It has no more than curiosity value, when you're wondering "gee, I wonder why feature X turned out the way it did".

Pascal, Leibniz, Babbage, Turing: if these names mean nothing to people it means they don't care about computing history, which in itself says nothing about their qualities as programmers. Being a history buff may demonstrate interest, but not being one doesn't demonstrate that you're a worthless code monkey.

It may well be that you need to study the creators "in the art of software development". For the *craft* of software development, though, studying their output seems to suffice if you're not striving to become an artist yourself.

If like me you thought that Jeff's "no-hire" quote was arrogant nonsense but are curious to know just who most of these people are anyway, rather than looking them up on Wikipedia the best thing to do is just go to the book's web page here: http://www.codersatwork.com/. There is a brief one page summary of each of the people mentioned there.

To take just the first name in the list as an example, I have a book on optimizing compilers. I looked up Fran Allen in it and yes she's there in the history section on page 3 along with a host of other names. No disrespect but even for geeks she's hardly a household name.

The next one, Joe Armstrong, is "famous" for creating a language 99.9% of us have never used (and probably never will). Etc.

Pfft.

I wouldn't hire anyone who didn't know who any of these people are:

Matthew Smith
Paul Woakes
Geoff Crammond
David Braben
Ian Bell

Joe Armstrong ? The one from Green Day?

Besides, Jeff probably said 'at least one' cause he knew who Knuth is ;)

I see your 'at least one' Jeff, and raise to 'at least two'!

At my IT software company, we ask our interviewees for the exact number of transistors in a 8086 processor. Failing to answer is an immediate no-hire.

@Bartek
I suggest reading this reply to 'duct tape programmers': http://jwz.livejournal.com/1096593.html

Nothing you said about the situation was correct.

that would eliminate the guys I work for (architect and lead programmer)... couldn't name a single one.

And dont forget boys and girls.

If your candidate does not know who Jeff Atwood is,
he's probably reading some really good blogs, definate hire.

What the hell is with the anoying as hell capatcha?

Look! Jeff Atwood just jumped the shark!

As stated many times above your claims are ludicrous. Not to mention elitist and completely wrong. Even mentioning the fact that not knowing those programmers so that people will read up on them is crazy. Its actually these types of statements that have kept me from trying to find a job programming, when in fact I am a pretty decent programmer compared to those that work in the same company as I do. I typically read your blog and I am typically right with you Mr. Atwood, but on this one I am going to have to say you're an idiot. Sadly I will read many posts to follow with great skepticism...guess thats the risk you take when you make stupid claims.

Good day!

Josh,
Thanks for the link. So it looks like Joel cared not to point out the little significant fact that jwz wasn't responsible about the Netscape Navigator 4 disaster, while he did all the good work _before_ the event. Who'd think that? All he said was "this dude worked at that browser and he refused to use helpful stuff like C++ templates".

On the other hand I'm going to defend the part I wrote about NN6 being responsible for the vanishing of Netscape. I remember Gecko and I remember hating it. So not everything I wrote was wrong, even if I'm a jerk and don't check my facts.

Thanks, thanks and triple-thanks for the link with the '86 Programmers at Work interviews.

Really interesting stuff.

Summation of the majority of the above:

Group A: People that didn't know someone in the list rant with "THIS IS RIDDIKULUS"

Group B: People that did know at least someone in the list, take it as the joke it's meant to be, or at least somewhat partially agree with Mr. Atwood.

I think Jeff is just saying he expects people with a worthy degree and are passionate about what they do must have heard of one of the people in the list - and I agree.

If you find yourself in "Group A" that just tells me that you didn't get a worthy education (or you didn't pay attention while you were suppposed to be getting it) or you don't really give a crap about your profession.

Ken Thompson for the Unix fans
Joshua Bloch for the java crowd
Knuth - for everyone

Unfortunately we missed an interview with Edsger W. Dijkstra, now *that* would have got me to buy the book (actually nothing would, I already have 3 in the queue and they never seem to get opened).

If somebody doesn't know MY name, then it's an immediate no-hire. Also, if they don't know what Bill Buckner signifies, then they're outta here too :-o

"If the next programmer you interview can't identify at least one of the programmers interviewed in Coders at Work and tell you roughly what they're famous for …

… I'd say that's an immediate no-hire."

huh?

I don't know if you do it intentionally Jeff but lately you've been writing blog posts that are overall good but you are including in them one little sentence or paragraph that makes me go "WTF?!".

I'm not sure if you do it to get people to write more comments but it's certainly working.

Given the background to this site, why isn't Steve McConnell on the list?

I now realize I wouldn't want to work for you. Laying such minefields is not only a lame approach to interviewing but it will put a very bad taste in the mouths of potential employees. What, are you going to make sure my socks are color-coordinated? The weight you seem to place on your personal opinions is a reflection of how your ego has gotten the best of you. And stop patting yourself on the back with your website. We all know by now - good for you. Get back to writing intriguing, thought-provoking entries. My 2.5 cents.

"Do you need to know who invented the wheel to work in the automobile industry? Or who invented bottle openers to work in a restaurant?"

Of course not. But if you work in the automobile industry, you should know big names like Ford, Honda, etc. Or if you work in the restaurant industry, you should probably know the names when it comes to large distributors, vendors, etc.

It's not a question of how you should take a language you use and know the entire history of it. But you'd hopefully be immersed enough in the language/technology/whatever that you're at least familiar with the names of people who contribute a lot to it.

It always is entertaining to see the knee-jerk reaction folks have to the stuff posted on here.

Hero worship is not a requirement to work for me. Who cares who these guys are? Programming is about getting shit done, not citing authorities.

Wow, a lot of people on this blog who will not be hired by Jeff. Makes his job easier I guess.

I think the real issue Jeff was trying to get at was whether you have any intellectual curiosity about the field, not a test of plain knowledge. If you don't know any of those names, but were curious and looked them up on Wikipedia, then I'd say you have intellectual curiosity and an interest in learning. I have a feeling (from past blog posts) that Jeff would see that as a good sign.

"If the next programmer you interview can't identify at least one of the programmers interviewed in Coders at Work and tell you roughly what they're famous for …
… I'd say that's an immediate no-hire. "

I don't know any of thoses programmer. They don't show you those in school. I still am a good programmer. I don't see why you wouldn't hire someone if they don't know about some programmers, even if they have done some great things in their life!
It doesn't mean they are not good programmers.
It just means that this person haven't heard of that person. And maybe I know about other programmers that you don't know about. I'm from Quebec, so what if I learned about other programmers that did important things but over here in Quebec.

@Andy Krouwel, Matthew Smith wrote Manic Miner and Jet Set Willy.

The only one I know in that list is Knuth, but I wouldn't be able to say what he's famous for, only that he's really famous.

I wouldn't consider myself a bad programmer either, I stay up-to-date with the technology and I'm pretty sure my bosses are quite happy with my work and knowledge of programming.

To be fair, I'm not sure programming is my true calling (I enjoy designing applications much more) and I have zero-interest in the low-level stuff, I hate working on mathematics algorithms.

I used to know who some of those people were, but I've forgotten because I realized that really, there wasn't any practical reason for me to.

cool story, bro!

I really can't think of a situation when the knowledge of Brian Kernighan or Donald Knuth would help me in any way in a project. It's nice to know the history of the craft, but what matters is the skill in it - that's universally applicable, no matter what*.

*Note: History as in "this approach to problem A has been tried and it failed" does count into skill and knowledge rather than history.

I know a buttload of programmers who can quote all sorts of lines from books or conferences. Knowing who did what really doesn't make a person a better programmer. I don't understand what knowing a name has anything to do with how you code.

Programmers who show up for interviews without (running) samples of their work (on the web or on a laptop) are an immediate no-hire.

How's that?

Jeff

I'm sure you didn't mean that in strictly words. Of course a good understanding of what's going on today is reviewing a bit of history.

A lot of people don't know Linux was created based on Minix inspired the creation of Linux (see Wikipedia). I studied Minix before I went into the Operating System classes and it made me more comfortable with all system calls within its kernel, it made sense to me.

@Noah Yetter - "Programming is about getting shit done" - last time I heard this from an architect I worked with he really released shit, monstrously shit system. But I understood this message too. :)

A whole article and everyone is hung up on a single throw-away sentence...

Of course, if all these great names know why *you* are, then you're a definite hire!

If I recall Jeff had to be corrected about pronouncing Dijkstra's and Knuth's names correctly, yet he's telling us we need to know one of these or we should never be hired?

Personally, I'd take someone who knows what NP Complete means over someone who pretends to know or who just knows a few names from reading a book about "coders"...

If you went to college for CS you should know who Knuth and Dijkstra are. But that is not something I ask during interviews. Trivia is not a valuable "skill" in our profession.

But that's just me.

"Who are 15 people who have never been in my kitchen", Alex?

The creators of C and Java are not in that list, as someone previously stated.

Chill out folks. I worked with someone that would ask you to tell a joke in the middle of the interview to see how you did under pressure and to guage how well you got back on track after. Stop taking everything so literally people, it's not like he said he's not hire someone in the past because they couldn't indentfy Brandon Eich.

Thanks for the book references !

My captcha read 'flower-power' & the next one read 'poisoned of' !

This is similar to people who get upset with pro athletes for not knowing the big names in the history of their sport.

I recognized Donald Knuth's name, but then I looked him up on Wikipedia and apparently didn't know a damn thing about him. Oh well. I probably just saw his name on this site at some point, likely from one of the book reviews.

Jeff takes out stick and whacks the hornets nest again, way to go!

If you don't like it, quit subscribing, quit reading, quit being so pompous and commenting on how superior you are.

For me, I doubt that these people would ever come up in an interview, but if someone were discussing the correct way to write Java, and they did not know of Bloch, I would have to wonder. Where did this person learn these things?

I only recognise Donald Knuth, but still I am so ashamed by Jeff's assertion I am compelled to quit software development and pose as a beggar instead.

;-)

Comon folks, after so many years you should be used to Jeff making extreme statements to lure controversy and your attention.

;-)

LOL, love your musings Jeff but I think someone is just filling 'dead air' here.

I only vaguely recognised Knuth and I've programmed for 20 years. Reading their papers and books may make me a better programmer but remembering their names won't, it's just trivia.

If an interviewer struck me off his list of potential candidates for this I'd think 'good luck' (and probably thank my lucky stars).

I'd say that this is an immediate retarded statement:

"I also realized Coders at Work can potentially serve as a job interview filter. If the next programmer you interview can't identify at least one of the programmers interviewed in Coders at Work and tell you roughly what they're famous for …

Frances Allen Joe Armstrong Joshua Bloch
Bernie Cosell Douglas Crockford L. Peter Deutsch
Brendan Eich Brad Fitzpatrick Dan Ingalls
Simon Peyton Jones Donald Knuth Peter Norvig
Guy Steele Ken Thompson Jamie Zawinski

… I'd say that's an immediate no-hire. "

What in the world would that have to do with hiring a young kid out of college who can not only code but can provide conceptual solutions, learn the business, and work hard? Geeez.

"If the next programmer you interview can't identify at least one of the programmers interviewed in Coders at Work and tell you roughly what they're famous for …"

That is a pretty arbitrary thing to disqualify someone for -- but I guess to each their own.

The only requirement that I make when I hire someone is that they can solve a Rubik's cube in under 60 seconds while naming the previous U.S. presidents in alphabetical order.

I started reading the books few days ago after reading "Founders at Work", another good book. I usually skip the "How did you start programming" to save time. I have read too many TRS80/Apple II stories.

Being a developer using Microsoft tools for long, I noticed there are tons of tools being used out there. At Google, for instance, they use stuff I never heard of.

There are so many good programmers out there, this book could be in volumes.

I see where Jeff is coming from. If you don't care about your craft, you are never going to be a master. Competent, certainly. Master, never.

That's the inescapable truth. As long as you are doing rout work, just going with the flow of whatever framework is the latest fad, you can be perfectly competent, but you are just not pushing the limits.

If you are pushing the limits, then you'll get to talk to people, to learn what was tried, what worked, what didn't. You'll build upon he work of others.

If you aren't interested enough in computer science to know at least some of the important people in the field, you aren't, and never will be, a master.

And if you think that list is too limited, you may be partially right. But I'm pretty sure Jeff would hire you if you answered you don't know any of them, but you know X, Y and Z because of this and that. It shows you CARE about the profession, instead of it being just a day-job.

So, complain away as much as you want. I wouldn't hire you either.

Of course it's only a joke, but it is interesting to compare this with Jeff's other interview joke:

"What's the worst code you've seen recently?

If their answer isn't immediately and without any hesitation these two words:

My own.

Then you should end the interview immediately."

It seems for Jeff it's not what you know, it's who you know.

Good stuff. But it makes me wonder...

With all the statements Jeff has made about who he would not hire, would he would even pass his own tests? :p

Two thoughts: with the state of software development today, all the work that needs doing and not enough people to do it, shouldn't your interviews be geared more to why anyone would want to work for your company? Sure, there's the paycheck, but unless you sell your company to someone, then all they're in it for is the paycheck, as far as you know.

Secondly, so what if someone's just exchanging their time for money? Does absolutely everyone have to be a hobbyist too? Do riveters have to obsess about riveting all the time?

Demanding that someone invest their personal time into their "craft" (i.e. your job) is presumptuous and erodes the 40-hour workweek the same as an on-call phone or forced overtime. Have some respect for the grey-collar working man. Let him spend the time that you expect him to learn this stuff with his family instead. Pay him fairly for his work and let him go home to enjoy his life, not study to impress you.

"I also realized Coders at Work can potentially serve as a job interview filter. If the next programmer you interview can't identify at least one of the programmers interviewed in Coders at Work and tell you roughly what they're famous for … [snip] … I'd say that's an immediate no-hire."

Uh, as so many have pointed out already, that's quite the non sequitur indeed. It's like asking a potential porn film actress if she can identify at least one famous porn star, else, I'd say that's an immediate no-hire. She's a hotty, knows all the positions, and is willing to do... anything, but oh, doesn't know who jenna jameson is, well, that's it, show her the door.

However, if you were looking to hire dweeb tech fanboys who quiver, spasm, and emit "nerd laughs" at the sight of computers or Bill Gates, I guess this would be an excellent interview filter.

Funny...I'm a scripter, not an exceptional programmer, and I recognized and could talk about two of the list (one of whom I had spoken to in the distant past). I would expect that anyone serious about programmer or at least googling a programming solution would have encountered JWZ.

@Chritian - You are either brilliant or incredibly paranoid. Time will tell, my friend.

I think the criticisms here are a valid, but the stones (from the safety of anonymity) being thrown are unnecessary. If you read Jeff regularly, then you know he's an enthusiastic guy. If I jumped down my friends throats this hard every time they said something stupid, I'd have no friends. By all means, call him out. But cut him the same amount of slack you would for a person sitting in the same room as you. On a personal level, I'd just like to believe that the people that I share my interests with aren't so da*n bitter. And not so willing to argue about the 1% of ridiculousness in the 99% of a good article.

@Daniel Sobral

Well, at least I know I'm not alone. Feels good. :)

I will never, never, NEVER, understands this prevalent attitude shown programmers getting their panties in a bunch when it is suggested that they should better themselves.

Would they prefer to hire a 9-to-5 surgeon or one that reads medical journals and goes to seminars and conferences (and, thus, could recognize the *name* the author of that article or the person giving the seminar)?

Jeff,
I get the distinct impression you wrote this blog entry just for the sake of writing a blog entry. It doesn't appear that a lot of thought went into this, which is disappointing.
Is Stack Overflow not generating enough revenue?

"...I'd say that's an immediate no-hire."

That's a bunch of bull IMHO...

I suck at remembering names and other pieces of useless information. It's tough to get a full appreciation of these people when you've never worked with them or saw their code (Maybe a book of their code samples would be better?). It's like saying Micheal Jordan was great because I saw him on a box of Wheaties.

Interesting idea, but I think your bar is a little too high. Perhaps, if you had said anyone who can't name another programmer who has inspired them to be better without limiting it to just that list, I would agree. As it is, a lot of the people who have influenced me most don't appear on that list: Bob Martin, Alistair Cockburn, Kent Beck, Martin Fowler, ...

FWIW, I am hireable, but just barely.

53c byte

This blows my mind. Would you expect an electrical engineer to know who Tesla or Maxwell is? Wouldn't you be suspicious of one who didn't even recognize their names?

'They book-readers think they're so smart!!!', let us sit here and code instead as we always has done. Okay, it's a little bit tedious to write hundreds of if-statements per day and have everything in a single file and all variables are global. What you gonna do? Ain't gonna be one of those book-readers - they think they are so smart!!!!

I see a lot of sore folks here. Perhaps Jeff's suggestion has come off a little harsh but, one thing Jeff has consistently expressed throughout the life of his blog is a passion for for the industry. He has never once hid the fact that his passion borders on obsessiveness with what others may consider minutiae. I get the impression that he thoroughly loves computers and computing and all things tangential and in-between, down to the devices that go in his pocket, wallet or knapsack on his way to work (in that industry). It is that passion that lies behind a statement which on it's face seems elitist; but is in fact probably no less than the "love of the game". Surely one would expect even a batboy to at least have heard of Barry Bonds, Derek Jeter, Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, or Jackie Robinson, should that batboy expect to walk on to Wrigely Field or Comerica Park. What buck private hasn't heard of Napolean Bonaparte or Field Marshall Montgomery, Field Marshall Rommel, or Leonidas? Is it too much to ask that someone is a least a tiny bit familiar with some of the luminaries in the field of their chosen profession? Perhaps not, if one merely punches a clock and warms the watercooler with their forearm. But I believe that Mr. Atwood pours a good deal of effort in what he does, and would like to be surrounded by others who do the same.

I think that's a bit much about not hiring someone based on not knowing peopel from those lists. If you haven't read "AI a Modern Approach," "The Art of Computer Programming," "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, programmed in Erlang and followed the community, follow the Javascript community extensively, or keep up with the very newest Turing Award winners, then you very well might know those people unless you are kind of a programming groupie as someone else said. But you still might be a great programmer that works well with others and all that jibber jabber.

Given the kinds of anti-intellectualism I see on this blog a lot I doubt Jeff as done any of the things previously mentioned, other than follow the Javascript community. It's one thing to know "roughly" what Knuth is famous for and quite another to be able to speak intelligently about "The Art." Honestly, I don't find it that impressive to be able to spout a non-technical eight word sentence about a handful of the names of computer science pioneers.

Many of my very competent colleagues would only know Knuth or vaguely recall Thompson from that list (well, besides Frances Allen) and they win awards in this field themselves.

You're an idiot. Consider yourself dropped from required reading.

"If the next programmer you interview can't identify at least one of the programmers interviewed in Coders at Work and tell you roughly what they're famous for …

Frances Allen Joe Armstrong Joshua Bloch
Bernie Cosell Douglas Crockford L. Peter Deutsch
Brendan Eich Brad Fitzpatrick Dan Ingalls
Simon Peyton Jones Donald Knuth Peter Norvig
Guy Steele Ken Thompson Jamie Zawinski

… I'd say that's an immediate no-hire. "

So, you only want old guys...

@Tarkin

The problem is - Jeff didn't even know to pronounce Knuth and now he is spouting some BS about kicking people to the curb. He continuously shows ignorance of classic CS topics and then has the audacity to suggest that you don't hire someone because the candidate can't recognize your name dropping?

Once again I was duped into reading this tripe and commenting on it. Jeff has won again.

Some people are trying to say the critics are being silly because they don't realize Atwood is trying to show that you should expect those you hire to have some intellectual curiousity but I argue that is hardly the case. The fact is, that is just an example of Atwood promoting a faux intellectual curiousity that only scratches the surface; it's more vanity than anything else.

@Tarkin, you really think every "buck private" has heard of Napoleon, Montgomery, Rommel, and Leonidas? If so, then I have a bridge to sell you ...

@Charles - Take a chill pill friend... lol. You've posted 3 times within 30 minutes. Why would you bother reading someone's writing if you don't believe in them? Take off your shoes, walk in the grass and stop trying to use your "superior intellect" to save us from from this blog.

I will never scroll down again. I swear to God. The infinitely small amount of real information that comes from these comments is not worth wading through the trolls.

Jeff,

I'd fail your test.

Then again, I've only been programming for over 10 years. So much for my bachelor’s degree. So much for those C, C++, C#, Java, and AI classes. So much for my experience in the IT Dev trenches at Intel, Wells Fargo, Nike, and IT focused start-up. What kind of developer do you want a historian who knows who’s who or someone that knows the ideas?

BTW: You just lost a lot of credibility and entered the "pompous ivory tower ass" category in my mind with that one comment. Sigh.

Hehe. I got the best one!

Anyone whining in a blog comment is an immediate no-hire!

O darn, I'm fired...

I guess you aren't gonna be hiring many young people who look up to a younger generation programmers as mentors...

I'm a bit dissappointed at the tone from such respected programmer bloggers lately.

I like these guys and read their posts, but really, what's up this week? Can't Joel and Jeff sell us on a book without being so condescending about it?

I'm getting a little tired of hearing from my mentors that either I agree with their new revelations or I'm simply not cut out to be a good programmer any more.

Coders at Work may very well be a good book but these guys are really turning me off of it.

I love how every time you post something highly flammable there are 536253 posts of people saying that they hate you and will never ever ever read your posts again... Every time!! This is better than watching soccer game fights.

The list was great, it makes me want to quit my job to do something more meaningful with my life.

"Jeff,

I'd fail your test.

Then again, I've only been programming for over 10 years. Blah blah blah, I'm so clever and awesome, and u suck Jeff " -and all the other comments along the same lines....

Just.. what exactly have you been doing all those 10-20 years? Never bothered to read a book, or a blog about programming? Is this the first coding horror entry you've ever read? I'm not trying to argue that you had to have heard of those people to be a good programmer (and I don't think jeff is arguing that either), but I have to wonder how someone like you can possibly exist, unless you just have a bad memory for names. Have you ever heard of a guy named Barack Obama? how about George Washington? Let's try someone more obscure.... Benjamin Franklin? Thomas Edison? Keep in mind jeff isn't saying you have to recognize all those names, just--- At least one.

I also wonder about the credibility of a programmer that feels the need to constantly defend their own capabilities from all potential slights. "No jeff, you're wrong! I AM an awesome programmer, I can prove it! I have a degree!", no.. . good programmers don't spend any time defending their skills to strangers on the internet. They're too busy making piles of money, or programming something amazing.

I can't help but be reminded of the time that Charlize Theron made an anti rape ad for south african television where she said "Rapists aren't real men", and got a flood of complaint mail from people who didn't appreciate that implication.

http://www.maplestory4mesos.com is a Specialized MapleStory Mesos store,we sell Maple Story Mesos,you can buy Safe Maple Story Mesos,Cheap Maple Story Mesos from us."

I like this blog, but sometimes it goes off a few bytes.

If you, for instance, take into consideration people from other parts of the world (me), other continents and other countries. On one hand, some of them would have known of one or two people from the list, but most of them wouldn't know a single name on that list.

I would've passed the test, but thats only because I read allot and frequently review and rewrite code from some of those great programmers whose names have passed my memory buffer registers over the years.

People that I know and whom I have worked with would have certainly failed this test, because they refrain from code, computer or any other kind of history. They thrive on their programming skills and their mathematical and logical sense of seeing things. Who's to say that they also don't belong on that list.

I would present you with my own list of people, carefully selected, chosen if you will, who's code I glanced upon and who's programs I ran night after night, but who would care?

+1 for Ian Bell. Likewise Paul Collingwood, Owais Shah and Ravi Bopara

Its funny, because if someone asked me that question in an interview, I wouldn't take the job. :-)

Do the blokes of the list all know each other or would they "no-hire" themselves?

ahh jeff u never learn do u..?

Oh god. Why is everyone who writes a comment here so massively insecure?

Breton says, "Just.. what exactly have you been doing all those 10-20 years?"

That is exactly the point, though. You can't tell me what someone has been doing for 10-20 years based on whether they can cite specific people or works.

Like many people here, I could only tell you I've heard of Knuth's name, but I couldn't tell you what he's known for. Of course, now I know he authored The Art of Computer Programming and creted TeX ... but it seems odd that such trivia, gathered in mere seconds through Wikipedia, should really make all the difference in calcuating my business value.

Breton continues, "Never bothered to read a book, or a blog about programming?"

Not to speak for DigitalMoto, but of course that is nonsense.

Personally, if someone was to ask me about influential works I would rhyme off names like Hunt, Thomas, Myers, Dikstra, Liskov, Fowler, McConnell, Sutter, Stroustrup, Abrash, etc, etc, etc ... I'd even throw a prop out to Joel and Jeff, despite them having an affinity for controversy lately.

Jeff almost makes a great point in this post: That it is important to guage how much potential programmer candidates care about their craft, and if they are passionate enough to set aside some precious time for independent study.

... but he can of blew it with that narrow list.

Would you trust a "physics scientist" who had no idea who Newton was?
In all fields there are people who have done great advances, their genius is such that it's hard to learn about this things without knowing who they are.

I'd doubt that someone who had no idea who Alan Turing was (or at least that he was a person) has a deep understanding of Turing-Church machines or know about their implications.

Because it's hard to learn about optimal algorithms (and proving such mathematically) without ever, ever hearing a reference to Knuth's work has ever really learned a lot about efficiency, different techniques, and different algorithms. Moreover I'd doubt he'd know where to look for an optimal solution for a very strange problem (or realizing there is no such optimal solution).

I wouldn't trust a "Linux Kernel Hacker" who doesn't know who Linus is, or an open source "guru" that only returned a blank stare when he heard the name Stallman.

In every field there are great people, if you are into painting I'd expect you'd recognize a few know artists, Picasso, Magritte, Monet. If you were into music I'd expect that you know The Pixies, or maybe The Beatles, or maybe Mozart, or any combination, but I'd hope that you have heard other music and know it's good.

Maybe we can't recognize all the names, or all the things. But get a list of enough important people in a field, and you will find one that you not only heard of, but either admired, or detested, their actions and philosophy enough to remember them and recognize them.

Now it's true, Atwood is stretching it a bit too far with such a limited list, maybe a better use of words, such as "I'd hope that any person who I'd hire would know at least one person in this list" but then again, is it surprising that he just went and said the first thing that came to his mind? Flame-wars are the publicity stunts of the 'net. So chillax people, if you don't know people on the list, instead of arguing why you still should be a valid candidate for work, read about them, learn, become a valid candidate and then gain the pleasure of being the one who would return a rejection letter, in the end you can only become better programmers because of it.

I read a decent article on here a few months ago and added Coding Horror to my igoogle.

Now I just wonder why so many people feel compelled to read and reply to this nonsense.

I guess given that list I would never get a job in programming, after all i didn't do CS degree and not done a formal course in anything but mathematics c; however, tbh, i don't seem to being too bad in my career :)
In my job, no one cares who you know, its purely based on skill. I don't recall any of the questions checking those sorts of names in any test / interview i did those years ago to get an internship/grad post. A lot o f fellow CS students didn't even get an interview.

That list is also quite US centric - there are a lot of developers in other countries around the world, and I qould hazard a guess that at least some of them might be pretty darn good.

Just for a funny example, one of the best developers I've ever worked with didn't know who were Bob Dylan, steven Spielberg and Ronald Reagan. Not everything American is automatically known in other countries.

Well I'm a non American and I can't imagine not knowing who are Bob Dylan, steven Spielberg and Ronald Reagan. This guy was probably "non earthling" more than "non American". Lol

The book is fascinating, but they are the top programmers (most of them) in the sense of language creation and research, rather than large scale real world development. I highly recommend it, and it'll definitely inspire you to take a look at other languages, but I'm not sure that they are the people you should be taking advice from if you really are doing large scale real world development.

I have a similar routine, I ask 'What are your thoughts on Joel Spolsky and Jeff Atwood?', if the answer contains any hint of positivity I know the time to invest in breaking the programmers existing bad habits and building them into a competent, able developer is too great and simply not worth it, especially if influenced by those morons.

I had a boss who thought that anybody fond of using a pair of jeans HAD to be dumb. I think Jeff has reached this level too, to my surprise.

BTW, is Jeff getting used to the "fire & forget" way of blogging? I can't find any answer neither this post, nor some of the previous.

Perhaps this blog has reached inertia enough to keep rolling without his interaction, kinda prepetuum-mobile-blog.

Coding is not horror.I love coding and I am a software engineer.I love these kind of interview.Thanks for sharing.

As someone previously mentioned, it is important to differentiate between name dropping and actual proper familiarity with the works of one of the luminaries of the field.

Being able to say "Knuth is that old guy who wrote all those big books on algorithms" isn't at all impressive compared to actually having read his books. I'd rather know if you can tell me the difference between NP-Complete and NP.

Similarly, I don't care whether you know that Peter Norvig wrote "that AI book", I'd rather know whether you're familiar with the "no free lunch" theorem.

You might know who Ken Thompson is but can you tell me the advantages and disadvantages of micro-kernels and monolithic kernels?

etc etc etc, I could go on. For those of you who actually know who those above 3 people are, can you then follow that knowledge up with actual knowledge of that field? I doubt it for most.

where in the hell is John Carmack?

Coders at work is an excelent reading!! It's really cool to know a little about how those programmers think and how they write software.

I admit that I don't know all of the programmers on that list. Specifically, I've heard of Brendan Eich, Douglas Crockford, Brad Fitzpatrick, Donald Knuth, Ken Thompson, Joshua Bloch, and Jamie Zawinski. Of those, I only know what Eich, Fitzpatrick, and Thompson did (well, I know Knuth wrote some books on algorithms).

Of the ones I do know, I fail to see why two of them are important.

For instance, why would I expect people to know Brad Fitzpatrick? His major claim to fame is that he created Livejournal. I know his company created several technologies used by it (memcached, perlbal, etc...), but I was not aware that he was personally involved in any of them!

Also, why would you expect people to know Brenden Eich, the guy who created the mess that is Javascript? I only found out who he was when the browser makers rejected his ECMAScript 4 proposal.

this blog sucks

I couldn't agree less. The biggest mistakes I've ever seen made in hiring developers in the past, are programmers who won't move with the times.

"What are your thoughts on Joel Spolsky and Jeff Atwood?"

Instant hire: "Who?"

The coders we despise are the guys that waste all of their time reading some BS written by Joel or Jeff. Joel is busy managing a company that wrote fogbugz. If I can remember writting a full blown helpdesk system is easy as pie...

I'm amazed at how many people doesn't even know Knuth. He's the father of algorithm complexity, Big-O notation, analysis of algorithms.

Sure, there are many people who don't know what that is either, and I couldn't care less about them. But I'm guessing many of the people complaining do know that linear complexity is better than exponential complexity. How can one study such subject and not have an inkling of who Knuth is, I can't fanthom.

I liked the one mentioning rivetters, and asking if they should develop a love of rivetting. Surely not, as long as they don't pretend to be engineers. There are no rivetting jobs with computers, just engineering jobs being done by rivetters who think that's all there is to it.

HA HA! These comments are hilarious!

If someone's teaching you how to program, names are the last thing you should be focused on. It won't magically transform you into a good programmer either, only practice will.

This blog is pretty annoying though.

*whistles and blows the unsubscribe button*

Controversy again. I fall on Jeff’s side, knowing at least one of the names is a reasonable indication that the candidate doesn’t just program for a living but lives for programming (religious overtones indeed). It's difficult to go through any amount of books on programming without coming across one of the names.

And don't forget to look up who called premature optimization the root of all evil.

Sean wrote:
>>Personally, if someone was to ask me about influential works I >>would rhyme off names like Hunt, Thomas, Myers, Dikstra, Liskov, >>Fowler, McConnell, Sutter, Stroustrup, Abrash, etc, etc, etc ... >>I'd even throw a prop out to Joel and Jeff, despite them having an >>affinity for controversy lately.

You didn't spell Dijkstra correctly. I would not hire you. You clearly have no passion for the craft.

Well, I agree with Jeff(tho' I've snarked off at him before). If you're a 9-5 punch-the-clock working stiff, maybe you don't know who those folks are.

But if you do enough rummaging around and reading, you're going to read about so-and-so who pioneered this, or popularized that, or was pretty good at the hoo-bab. Thing is, if you don't have a good memory or you don't rummage and study, you won't know the Big Kahunas of your area. Either of those is going to disqualify you for a job that requires good memory and some independent study.

I guess it might be the difference between a technician and a professional.

Thanks Charlie Lobo to summarize my thought :)

>>>But if you do enough rummaging around and reading, you're going to read about so-and-so who pioneered this, or popularized that, or was pretty good at the hoo-bab. Thing is, if you don't have a good memory or you don't rummage and study, you won't know the Big Kahunas of your area. Either of those is going to disqualify you for a job that requires good memory and some independent study.<<<
What kind of idiot would want to hire people based on their praise of people whose influence stopped being relative - or even tactile - over a decade ago?
I would much rather have a developer with a brain that can work out problems than an idiot that can recite useless trivia.
I enjoy most of your posts Jeff, but the last few days need a reset.

Jeff, your blog posts used to be 'all winners', but in the last year they have become 'hit or miss'. Well, at least you'll make some money when people click through and buy the books on Amazon, which you've conveniently linked for us

While I agree that understanding the history of computing is extremely important, I wouldn't give a programmer an automatic 'no-hire' for not knowing these names. It's exactly the type of closed minded, binary decision process that old school business always tries to impose. If a developer wasn't aware of Knuth's, "The Art of Computer Programming', it would send up a red flag, and I would question him/her in greater depth with regard to algorithms.

As a side note, I used to ask potential development managers if they read 'Joel on Software', and again it would raise a red flag if they hadn't. But now, your and Joels posts are less relevant and poignant than they used to be. #FAIL

Paul Nathan says, "But if you do enough rummaging around and reading, you're going to read about so-and-so who pioneered this, or popularized that, or was pretty good at the hoo-bab."

Yes, which would explain why the name Donald Knuth is *somehow* familiar, a common reflex for people who 'fail' Jeff's test.

Or course, the implication is that I don't give a crap about reading up on software engineering but from the volumes of self-study I've done I couldn't remember specifically where Knuth fit in. Did he invent one of the many programming languages I don't use? Was he instrumental in developing Unix? Is he one of the GoF? Or did he find/popularize some algorithm?

Is that bit of trivia *really* a deal-breaker? Or is it better that I know which container has the best algorithmic complexity for what you want to do with a collection of objects?

By all means, do your best to guage the passion and affinity for extra self-study in any candidate - but it is foolish to think you can grade effectively testing such specific name-dropping and factoids.

How come no one's mentioned this famous developer?

http://www.dba-oracle.com/images/redneck_smoke.jpg

I wonder how many of the guys on the list know about each other.

I better go and click on the Amazon links, whilst sending the CodeHorror referrals, and purchase those books or i won't have any chance of ever getting a job - and risk losing my current one!

Oh wait, i forgot that i'm not that easily manipulated.

"What kind of idiot would want to hire people based on their praise of people whose influence stopped being relative - or even tactile - over a decade ago?
I would much rather have a developer with a brain that can work out problems than an idiot that can recite useless trivia."

And you don't think research is part of problem solving?

Hmm. Can't read right now. Too busy coding...

I respect your opinion, Jeff. It's definitely good to be aware of some fundamentals ideas developed by famous computer scientists and programmers, even though I doubt that it's important to remember their names and who did what.

But I guess at some point you should just shove all those books aside and simply start coding, tackling problems as they come by. I'm sure I don't have to tell you that, seeing that you're a successful entrepreneur.

I could read books about algorithms and design all day long, but at the end of the day I need to enter the unforgiving, imperfect and messy real world. And we all know that theory and practice do diverge.

You can try to describe and understand each and every detail of a can of worms. It stays a can of worms nonetheless.

Worst post ever

Oh yeah lets not hire the guy who knows how to write programs lets hire the guy who knows the names of some. By the way I actually know 4 from your list so it's not sour grapes it's just a terrible way of eliminating candidates and I don't expect a programmer to make illogical statements like this.

It's nice to read about ideas of other people. But worshiping them because the are famous or so called great thinkers is a big mistake IMHO. You can get inspired and excited, but thinking that if you know their names or what they did will improve then you are seriously mistaken.
Making this a job requirement makes me think that you lack yourself creativity and think other people do so, too. Therefore they must follow the "giants" to do anything useful.

I really hate when people start this stupid worshiping, get inspired but also think you can be at least as creative or even better. Don't be a follower, be a creative leader yourself. More enjoyment and advancement for everybody.

Actually it's well documented and has been proven many times that if you don't know Bloch did the Collections API for Java that you can't work in a job related to computers in any way at all.

QED.

Q>
"If the next programmer you interview can't identify at least one of the programmers interviewed in Coders at Work and tell you roughly what they're famous for …
… I'd say that's an immediate no-hire. "

That is probably the single stupidest thing I've heard you say. Granted, you're normally pretty much right about this stuff, but that is an elitist statement
<Q

Completely agree. This is one of your stupidest statements ever Jeff. I don't know a single guy on that list and I've been programming for 20 years. Who gives a painted whore who did what first?

Time to start my own blog!

I wouldn't hire any of you f**kers! I'd probably just have to rewrite all your code anyay.

:-p

I do not know why all these people read this trivia here on this blog.

It is really a mistery for me and posts like this do not help to explain it more - an immediate no-hire if you do not know somebody?????? hello - not all programmers have time and will to sift through all those semi famous biographies and interview books. Some might actually have to well program or have a life besides programming - can you imagine?

Maybe its like in one of the Simpson shows where Homer as a Crusty replacement in his tv-show started talking about serious things - taking an advice from Lisa - whereas before he was just chatting away bar talk with Lenny: Watchers immediately started leaving. Guess its the same with this blog: Just write enought emotional touchy trivia and people keep coming.

Well I can understand why people do not know any of the programmers, but seriously.. Donald E. Knuth?

Come on guys, you can't tell me, that anyone who is even slightly interested in algorithms (ok I agree that there are some areas where that knowledge won't help you) could manage to circumnavigate that name. It's not about knowing his whole biography, but if you couldn't even recognize the name..

"It's nice to read about ideas of other people. But worshiping them because the are famous or so called great thinkers is a big mistake IMHO. You can get inspired and excited, but thinking that if you know their names or what they did will improve then you are seriously mistaken."

uhhh... that's a pretty fancy strawman you've built there. Must be some pretty nasty crows you're trying to scare off.

Well my background isn't the 'classical' from Uni to the workplace , being a RPG guy who shifted to CRM work .
I recognised Knuth ( Thanks Charles Stross !!, but no Torvalds , Gosling or Sinclair for the Brits out there...), but I think the major issue trying to be discussed is folks who go into the IT world just cos its seem to be said well paid and have no interest in it besides the pay cheque .

Now I've worked with great folks who could be described as being uninterested as they don't do stuff at home or show much enthusiasm , but were Professional about their jobs.
If you are looking for a bright eyed kid then at least some knowledge of the history would be helpful , it puts things into context on how they got into it and why they want to be there. Sometimes though , its not the be all and end all of an interview - experience, reliability and just common sense can be a much greater factor . Depends on what you do and want .

I knew what 7 of them were responsible for, but I admit that I am a rubbish coder.

Sorry, but this better not be the only interview question you ask.

Not that I'm looking for work.

Why isn't John McCarthy listed? ;-)

Can't identify at least one programmer?

I couldn't identify any of them.

Why? Because I am busy developing and building software, not preening myself reading what other programers have to say (other than reading this blog once every two weeks).

So, I don't care. I know what I am capable of, and if someone used that critia to hire me, I am glad they didn't, because I would be working for a foo foo, look at all the books I read, I can't program anything, moron.

And by the way, how can you continue to write this blog every day and still be a viable programmer?

If ur bloggin', you ain't codin'...

sometimes riddles/puszzles are a great way to learn about a person.

I was once asked to calculate the amount of gas stations in Arizona, i didnt do any math and answered: "Two. The one closes to my house and the one closest to work."

Coding Horror again.I do have paid much time in coding ,i was picked up as software analyst,but i know situation that coders face.

Thanks for your blog which has given so much information about coders

I bought the book immediately, since I loved Susan Lammer's book Programmers At Work, which I bought it when it first came out and actually got Bill Gates to autograph the book for me at Comdex one year, sometime in the 80's. I still have the book. I asked him how he knew how to write Basic for the Altair, and he said, well, it was the third time I'd written Basic. I tried to get him to write, "to jeff - thanks for all the help", but he wouldn't, he just signed it.

There's a feeling I get reading Coders At Work, that these guys were doing things at a young age that I still can't do after 30 years of coding. It's a fascinating read that you just can't put down. One common theme is that you should be reading other people's code, which I don't do enough of.

I love the book, it's awesome. I've also read Studs Terkel's book Working and the follow up book (not by Studs) called Gig. Those are also good books in this same category.

I think we programmers (phew, I am one now :-) ) tend to compile blog posts - one error, or a different syntax, and Bam! you have a 100 compiler errors.
What I've noted for a long time is that Jeff Atwood does not write code in his blog posts. He writes (emotionally charged?) *English*.
Defending him when he is such an authority who should not make mistakes? Maybe.
But the tone is of leisure, clearly, of encouragement, rather than strict compilerese.
It's a blog, and we probably should not spend time reporting the same error. He's not a source code generator here and we're not compilers.
I'm guilty of being a compiler too, but then I forgive myself too!!
:-) :-)

Be peaceful, write code, create stuff, make merry!
Take Jeff seriously, but maybe not literally and definitely not syntactically (error msg : error ratio ~ 10+ ) so.

And another post that prooves Jeff indeed is an idiot.

I would hire anyone rightaway that doesn't know Jeff Atwood ;)

>>>
"What kind of idiot would want to hire people based on their praise of people whose influence stopped being relative - or even tactile - over a decade ago?
I would much rather have a developer with a brain that can work out problems than an idiot that can recite useless trivia."

And you don't think research is part of problem solving?
<<<

Research - sure, I'll buy that for a dime. I still don't see how you relate quality of hire to who invented the wheel to fix a puncture. Or who coined the CMOS to support a computer. Or hell, who invented Javascript to develop a web app.

There's a lot of folks out there that -do- know this trivia though. Some people call them gifted. The medical community calls them idiot savants.

Why is it that according to everyone who would fail the test, the world of programmers can be exactly divided in:

1. Programmers who work all day long and have not a single minute to themselves.
2. Programmers who masturbate intellectually all day long by reading CS-related books and don't program at all (and yet, somehow, manage to get paid as programmers).

"Research - sure, I'll buy that for a dime. I still don't see how you relate quality of hire to who invented the wheel to fix a puncture. Or who coined the CMOS to support a computer. Or hell, who invented Javascript to develop a web app."

If you work seriously with javascript, like I do, sometimes you gotta ask Brendan a question. You can't do that if you've never heard of the guy, or you don't care enough about javascript to find out.

if you work seriously with programming, sometimes you might want to .. you know, become a better programmer. In which case Donald Knuth and his Art of Computer Programming series might be the first name you come across.

If you don't care about programming at all, maybe you've never heard of any of them. Maybe you think you're still a good programmer, in which case: good for you. It's important to have confidence and self esteem. But maybe your self esteem is easily punctured by random comments on internet blogs, in which case you might find yourself whining about how a certain blogger is an idiot, rather than, you know... Finding out who those people are, and figuring out why they might be important.

So we have here represented in the comments two broad approaches to problems. In one approach the programmer has stopped and complained loudly, and called Jeff Atwood an idiot. In the other case, the programmer as quietly investigated the problem, and used it as an opportunity for self improvement. This dichotomy of problem solving approaches is very indicative, I think, to how I would expect the programmer to approach and solve *programming problems*.

So, perhaps, knowing or not knowing a name on the list isn't an entirely good indicator- But how loudly someone complained in the comments section, most definately is.

I admit I only recognized three names :

Bloch because he wrote Effective Java and I'm a java programmer. BTW, if you are a java programmer and you haven't read Effective Java please go buy it for god sake.

Knuth because his name is almost in every computer science books

Steele because I have interest in Lisp/Scheme.

To the people complaining that they are to busy coding stuff. You need to train yourself (i.e : stop writing code and start reading stuff) to get better. Practice is essential and it is probably enough for your day-to-day job. But to improve you need to train yourself. One way of doing it is to read some well known books. If you read those books I will ended up reading one of those names.

So what Jeff meant, in his bold statement, is that he will only hired people that are willing improve.

>

3. Programmers who look by the window all day long (and yet, somehow, manage to get paid as programmers).

>Come on guys, you can't tell me, that anyone who is even slightly interested in algorithms (ok I agree that there are some areas where that knowledge won't help you) could manage to circumnavigate that name. It's not about knowing his whole biography, but if you couldn't even recognize the name..

What the hell does his name have to do with algorithms? Please explain that?

And this bloody capatcha has gone mad!
It's like irobot or something.

This is one major difference between Computer Science and History. In History, you have to know WHO discovered America. In Computer Science, you need to know HOW to code various types of sort. The person who first invented a type of sort is much less significant than knowing how to actually do it.

I've heard several of those names before, but I couldn't tell you what any of them did. Why? Because it simply is NOT significant to be able to develop good software. I would much rather someone know how to actually apply the right technique at the right time rather than someone who knows a bunch of CS trivia.

Trivia = matters or things that are very unimportant, inconsequential, or nonessential; trifles; trivialities.

If you come across a software developer who seems to know how to code but can't name anyone on that list, please send him/her our way. We will gladly take them on our team.

C'mon, you all know that trying to figure out who is going to make a good programmer is really a crapshoot, so people end up picking criteria that is very specific to them. Jeff's criteria means you would be a good programmer to work with Jeff, who has a very codified world view. It's about finding a programmer that is not just "good" is some unmeasurable way, but will make a good fit within the culture. I'd personally say that anybody who can't hear an opinion that they disagree with without calling them an idiot would be a no-hire.

And if you are commenting on a blog about programming, are you "passionate about your craft", or just a time-waster who if they were really passionate about their would be writing code. Hmmm, I may have to let myself go.

I only recognized Knuth and Eich and couldn't tell you specifically what they did other than Knuth's saying about premature optimization. I'm was a CS major, took a history of computing class in college, have been programming for 25 years, and am generally well read. Where's Babbage, Von Neuman, Turing, K&R? Your list is more like something I'd expect to see in People Magazine, not historical/theoretical signficance.

>>Come on guys, you can't tell me, that anyone who is even slightly interested in algorithms (ok I agree that there are some areas where that knowledge won't help you) could manage to circumnavigate that name. It's not about knowing his whole biography, but if you couldn't even recognize the name..What the hell does his name have to do with algorithms? Please explain that? <
Well if you are a genius who doesn't need to read anything about certain problems, then, yes, this doesn't apply to you. If you can't invent every complex algorithm out there yourself and have to read books or search the net, you'll almost certainly stumble upon Knuth.

I mean half of the books about these algorithms were written by him and the other half quotes him.
The Art of Computer Programming is one of the best and certainly the most comprehensive book about the whole subject out there and a great reference.

Jeff,

Thanks for the insanely kind words about Programmers at Work. Pretty amazing the interviews continue to have legs given the speed of change in computer world. No doubt I was lucky with my first PC wave timing and getting access to such incredible young talent! And it's nice to see Coders At Work carry forward the tradition.

"If the next programmer you interview can't identify at least one of the programmers interviewed in Coders at Work and tell you roughly what they're famous for …
… I'd say that's an immediate no-hire. "

This is incredibly stupid!

This blog is becoming worst and worst everyday! :(

It's really moronic, Jeff, when you yourself read a few books, like them a lot, and then declare that everyone who hasn't read them is not good enough. You too were at a point where you never heard of these guys. You're not any better. We too could zoom in on one particular aspect of the computing industry and self-declare it a must-have knowledge where you would fail at.

Furthermore, you fail to see the realities of the programming world, where at the most 5% would have the passion required to know this kind of stuff, and the rest just does it as a job.

Haha,
I love interview of people who really did anything admirable.Anyways, i loved the comments posted by the guys. :)

tldr; trolls and nubs don't know about my EXPERT PROGRAMMER skills

I couldn't read past about the top 50 comments so forgive me if I repeat; however, aside from the obvious trolls, there are some obvious pride-hurt programmers and obvious newbies to the field.

Joking or not, Jeff's statement that has caused so much preening has struck such a chord because it is truth.

My example, why would we ever want to know Knuth?

Knuth solves problems. Entire classes of problems, such as the _exact_cover_ problem, which _sudoku_ is a sub-problem of. He often does it in these interesting and efficient ways, such as the Dancing Links technique to efficiently solve this _exact_cover_ problem.

Why do I care about these things? Look them up. The implications are vast. Surely by now in these blog circuits you've heard about the AGILE programming DESIGN PATTERN advocate who tried to solve sudoku and got little more than a board representation in hundreds of lines of code. He could not even solve the sub-problem that Knuth solved completely, elegantly, and efficiently.

Knuth is also into provability, and proving programs correct. He has been known to write programs in pencil in longhand in notebooks before they ever reach the computer.

Maybe if you didn't know anyone on this list and were upset by the comment, you should pick the book up, read it, and then quite easily pass the simple and worthwhile red flag test put forth.

tldr; trolls and nubs don't know about my EXPERT PROGRAMMER skills

I couldn't read past about the top 50 comments so forgive me if I repeat; however, aside from the obvious trolls, there are some obvious pride-hurt programmers and obvious newbies to the field.

Joking or not, Jeff's statement that has caused so much preening has struck such a chord because it is truth.

My example, why would we ever want to know Knuth?

Knuth solves problems. Entire classes of problems, such as the _exact_cover_ problem, which _sudoku_ is a sub-problem of. He often does it in these interesting and efficient ways, such as the Dancing Links technique to efficiently solve this _exact_cover_ problem.

Why do I care about these things? Look them up. The implications are vast. Surely by now in these blog circuits you've heard about the AGILE programming DESIGN PATTERN advocate who tried to solve sudoku and got little more than a board representation in hundreds of lines of code. He could not even solve the sub-problem that Knuth solved completely, elegantly, and efficiently.

Knuth is also into provability, and proving programs correct. He has been known to write programs in pencil in longhand in notebooks before they ever reach the computer.

Maybe if you didn't know anyone on this list and were upset by the comment, you should pick the book up, read it, and then quite easily pass the simple and worthwhile red flag test put forth.

thanks for all admin
very good

what a bunch of idiots on here

its very simple

would you hire a physicist who doesn't know who Fermi is ?

well, its not important who you know, its what you know.
yeah, right [sarcasm]
that's just an excuse for people who don't know anything

I don't have time to read biographies about physicists. I'm to busy working.
yeah, right [sarcasm]
maybe the reason you're so busy is because you're so uneducated you don't even know the basics, so what should be an easy assignment is difficult for you

if you don't the basics, the big names in the history of your profession, then you're you lack the education to excel at your profession

Pedant:
A pedant is a person who is overly concerned with formalism and precision, or who 'makes a show of learning'. The corresponding (archaic) female noun is pedantess

@james L
You come off as a pedant.. I suspect you could probably define and give criticism on any of Guy Steele's theorums. I bet you'd be pretty good at discussing a few other people's skills and attributes.
But hey, not having a personality or skills of your own; that's normally accepted I guess. I'd still not hire you.

@james L
>>would you hire a physicist who doesn't know who Fermi is

If he had the skills, abilities and personality that matched the company I run, yes.
You still don't get it do you. It's got so much less to do with knowing about famous names, than it is about knowing your job. I bet Fermi didn't have a clue about Oklo at the time.

I'm in an wrong part of the industry. I've also found that having a PhD degree correlates strongly with no-hire as well. Our best hires have been those who've had to write a lot of software in the pursuit of some unrelated degree. Maybe I should pick the book up, read it.

Knuth is also into provability, and proving programs correct. He has been known to write programs in pencil in longhand in notebooks before they ever reach the computer.

I thought Knuth was a white bear?!?

Thanks for hosting codinghorror.com and sharing your ideas and opinions, Jeff. Forget about the crazy people who have no manners when they are a guest on your site.

There's something about this article that reads very much like a Reading Rainbow book review.

*BUH-DUM-BUM!*

I know some of those, don't know some others. I still don't find the correlation between one's ability to cite Computer Science biographies and one's ability to work software development/engineering with an acceptable level of quality. I'd like to think that was a joke, but knowing how extravagant software folks can get, I would not be surprised if were not.

Engineering disciplines in general, and software in particular, seem to attract certain colorful characters. Bright notwithstanding, some are incapable of functioning in a team, under pressure, with the heat right on the neck when the pedal meets the metal.

It's not just about how clever we are, or deep our knowledge of historical/technical minutia is. It's about organizational and interpersonal skills combined with sound software engineering principles and that talent (that usually comes with experience) that lets you know when to do things by the book and when it is time just to hack it and deliver it.

Those are the things that count when it comes to hiring people. Nothing else.

I'm still not seeing how wilful ignorance correlates to someone who's worth hiring. Sorry.

I'm still not seeing how knowing a list of names by heart correlates to someone who's worth hiring. Sorry.

If you don't like it, quit subscribing, quit reading, quit being so pompous and commenting on how superior you are.

I got a little worried when I first saw that list. I barely knew anyone but then I did a little poking around and found that I was quite familiar with many of their works.

I guess remembering their names was the important part that I missed.

Noted.

I am reading Coders at Work now, but I have been very disappointed.

I am not a big fan of that style (Interverviewer:... / Response:..., etc.). It's kinda lazy on the author's part.

I've been coding for well over twent years and a lot of stuff, specifically acronyms, are puzzling to me.

I don't want to keep a dictionary of technical terms with me while I am reading a book. That's the kind of stuff that should be cleared up by the author.

There have been a few aha moments, but I could count them on one hand.

It's odd that he didn't mention Programmer's at Work anywhere in the credits of the new book?

thanks for all admin
information is the most beautiful treasures

It seems that the standard argument to support the "no hire"-Theorem is "i cannot imagine how to not know this names if you are interested".

Beside the fact that this no argument but a shift of the burden of proof, it is pretty simple to explain how.

Take a hobbyist, who works, but likes to inform himself about this fancy O-thingy. Now he searches the Wiki. He finds out, that the father was a german guy called Landau (not, as previously statet, Knuth).
If the hobbyist now fights his way through 5 screenscrolls of Math (that minus the links he clicks to actually get the Math), he learns that it this already invented knowlegde was first applyied in computer science by knuth. If he cares to read the little History paragraph after the mind-boggling coolness of the stuff just learned.

It's even worse when he is german-speaking: in the german wiki, knuth is not even mentioned on the O-Notation-Page.

If he decides to study computer science, the hobbyist may be taught this topic the way he was taught analysis in school: without a historical detour to Leibniz or Omar Khayyám. At least that's how i remember my "Grundlagen der Informatik I" class: straight to the point.

And please dont mistake that as an excuse: Knuth was the name i recognized.

And comparing Computer Science to other fields does not fit here.
A Phsyicist will have heared about Newton, because it's called "Newtonian Physics", there are Units called "Tesla", and a thing called "Maxwell distribution". The names "Ford" and "Toyota" are even known to non-automotive-enthusiasts.

Now look at the list: It is the java collection framework, not the "Joshua Bloch Framework", it is the Netscape Explorer, not the Jamie Zawinski Browser. Heck, even if you are into Patterns, you may remember the Authors only as "Gang of Four" (as i do), but not their actual names.

So, in fact, it is very easy be a good programmer without knowing names: it happens, when you focus on the art, not on the artist.

It seems that the standard argument to support the "no hire"-Theorem is "i cannot imagine how to not know this names if you are interested".

Beside the fact that this no argument but a shift of the burden of proof, it is pretty simple to explain how.

Take a hobbyist, who works, but likes to inform himself about this fancy O-thingy. Now he searches the Wiki. He finds out, that the father was a german guy called Landau (not, as previously statet, Knuth).
If the hobbyist now fights his way through 5 screenscrolls of Math (that minus the links he clicks to actually get the Math), he learns that it this already invented knowlegde was first applyied in computer science by knuth. If he cares to read the little History paragraph after the mind-boggling coolness of the stuff just learned.

It's even worse when he is german-speaking: in the german wiki, knuth is not even mentioned on the O-Notation-Page.

If he decides to study computer science, the hobbyist may be taught this topic the way he was taught analysis in school: without a historical detour to Leibniz or Omar Khayyám. At least that's how i remember my "Grundlagen der Informatik I" class: straight to the point.

And please dont mistake that as an excuse: Knuth was the name i recognized.

And comparing Computer Science to other fields does not fit here.
A Phsyicist will have heared about Newton, because it's called "Newtonian Physics", there are Units called "Tesla", and a thing called "Maxwell distribution". The names "Ford" and "Toyota" are even known to non-automotive-enthusiasts.

Now look at the list: It is the java collection framework, not the "Joshua Bloch Framework", it is the Netscape Explorer, not the Jamie Zawinski Browser. Heck, even if you are into Patterns, you may remember the Authors only as "Gang of Four" (as i do), but not their actual names.

So, in fact, it is very easy be a good programmer without knowing names: it happens, when you focus on the art, not on the artist.

I totally agree that this is an extremely poor test of a potential hire. I'm the type of person that loves a song and I have no clue who sings it, I simply don't care.

It's the same with programming. Being self-taught, I know "how" and I taught myself "why" to do things a certain way. However, I really don't care who first thought of it. Unlike many that study at schools that don't understand the logic behind why you would do something a certain way. If reading interviews of specific people help you understand "why" something was done a certain way, great. Otherwise, I see little value in it myself. I read a lot of programming books, but I couldn't tell you the authors without looking at them, it's just not important information to me.

Hell, I'm even fuzzy on "Big 0 Notation". I just don't need to know it to be a good programmer. You need to understand when an algorithm is linear or exponential and what the alternatives are. Like many things, including patterns, it simply makes communication of the concept easier within a very narrow "development team". In business as a developer/designer, most of my conversations are with other stakeholders and they don't care about any of that. It either works and is fast or not. It's that simple.

first thought of it. Unlike many that study at schools that don't understand the logic behind why you would do something a certain way. If reading interviews of specific people help you understand "why" something was done a certain way, great. Otherwise, I see little value in it

nice,http:www.dfobaby.com http:www.idarkfallgold.com

Couldn't name one. Ouch!

But does Jeff know how much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood? Eh... I thought as much...

If that's your criteria for hiring, I wouldn't want to work for you either.

Chris... this is your boss... you are fired.

The big problem I have with this list is that these guys are mostly academics, not people who ship real software in a corporate setting. Sure, it's good for people to know about them, but I'd far rather a candidate know about people like Scott Meyers or Steve McConnell. I want people who are interested in how to produce good code. Knowing about airy stuff like language invention is just really not all that important for the average developer.

When looking for someone to design your house, do you want an architect who knows Frank Lloyd Wright or an architect who spends all his time reading about current building techniques?