I half read, half skimmed the contents, and what I found was significantly divergent from what I was hoping for.<p>I was hoping to find some combination of a breakdown of potential paper cuts that hold programmers back, and an insightful breakdown of seemingly insurmountable problems that keep programmers in their provincial comfort zones, providing a series of bite-sized victories to lead one to greatness.<p>Instead I found number of already well-tread tropes of self-acceptance, limiting the amount one compares one's self to others, finding friends, and taking breaks. Furthermore, it does this without presenting any kind of new model to achieve this within the programmers existing emotional, executive and motivational budget.<p>I don't know if I'm staggeringly abnormal but I'm already acutely aware of those requirements. Absent some seemingly miraculous improvement in my executive function, in order to effect change (at least in me), the content needs to provide either compelling anecdotes as to why I should try harder, or a new model that provides a path where the extra smashing of face is not required.<p>I fully acknowledge I have no claim of liability for the content not meeting my hopes, given the generous lack of cost, but I must say I'm disappointed.
> before we can become better programmers we have to pass through being mediocre programmers<p>Sure it's true, but it leaves out a fundamental truth about programming (and technically complex disciplines in general): most people that attempt programming will never be a good programmer - indeed most never even cross through the gate of mediocrity.<p>There seems to me to be a superegalitarian notion that all people given the same opportunities will be capable of achieving, if not the same, then comparable results on a given task (or set of tasks of a given type).<p>That simply is not true - "fake it 'till you make it" is not universal.
Being a mediocre professional is great! Do you complain when the guy cooking your meal at a restaurant is a mediocre restaurant cook? Or when the doctor prescribing your medicine is a mediocre doctor?<p>Anyone who is mediocre in their profession should still feel pride in what they do. Are you among the best? Maybe not, but you are good enough that people value what you do and that is what matters the most. If you find yourself in a position where nobody values what you do then you have a problem and need to fix it as soon as possible. But in that situation you aren't mediocre, instead your main goal will be to work hard so that you can become mediocre.
> The Mediocre Programmer is a book about the journey of becoming a better programmer. But before we can become better programmers we have to pass through being mediocre programmers. Mediocre doesn't mean a bad programmer --- far from it. It means lacking skill<p>Great idea.. We're all mediocre programmers at some aspect of development even after spending a decade in the industry. And conversely many still suffer imposter's syndrome. Seems like a great topic to address.
Mediocre programmer + Domain Expert >> Expert programmer + Mediocre domain knowledge<p>I'm not sure if the book discusses it, but I think the top number differentiation between being a mediocre to an expert programmer is actually being an expert in the problem domain and less in computer/programming specific.
> Rather, we'll discuss what it feels like to be a programmer. We'll talk about the emotions in being a programmer; the feelings of frustration, guilt, anger, and inadequacy. We'll cover the struggles in learning new things and keeping your skills current.<p>This is a refreshing change from the productivity-focus that seems prevalent here. Thank you.<p>A book about minimalism boils down to "It's ok to say no". But that doesn't mean it's wasted breath to talk through it. Sometimes simple, valuable lessons take time to digest.<p>Likewise; This book may have a simple lesson at its core, but such a valuable lesson is worth unpacking. It's worth taking some time to relax and digest it.<p>I'm looking forward to reading this. :)
The mediocre caveman:<p>I have everything I need. I do not need to learn about nature. Caves are very comfortable.<p>Raw meat is tasty, chewing it with my 3 remaining teeth is great.<p>I do not need innovation. I can happily live to my 30s... if I am lucky, and do not get killed by a wild animal or a member of my tribe. By the way, what is a justice system? sounds very complex, I do not care about it. I will fix all my grievances through violence.<p>Oh, by the way, some guys showed up mounting horses and using metal weapons and enslaved us. Perhaps I should have spent more time trying to innovate.<p>This is exactly what the mediocre programmers and mediocre organizations sound like. People about to get rekt by people that develop an understanding of their world and their craft and innovate.
I don't think it's so much about being a "programmer" as a just a better person.<p>In my experience the worst programmers usually have some bad personality traits, either lazy, unqualified or whatever else or sarcastic, rude, arrogant and runs across the spectrum of bad to good in terms of ability.<p>I think one of the keys to being a better programmer/person is having a good ability for self reflection and self awareness. Unfortunately these skills are developed at a very young age and in many cases it is too late to cultivate that mentality except some rare cases.
> Instead of trying to avoid it or wishing for comfort, we can instead relish that we're in uncertain territory and feel those brief twinges of fear and doubt.[1]<p>Generally true, but it also sounds like you’ve not made big mistakes.<p>Big mistakes often involve slight twinges of fear and doubt also.<p>[1]- <a href="http://themediocreprogrammer.com/build/html/the_mediocre_programmer.html#resistance-and-the-container" rel="nofollow">http://themediocreprogrammer.com/build/html/the_mediocre_pro...</a>
The funny thing is that another definition of mediocre is 'low quality'. And it seems plausible to me that even expert programmers can write low quality programs.
There should be a fourth fear in the "Giving Up" section: giving up a decent to great salary when being mediocre cuts it just fine in a lot of positions.