The Most Destructive Word in Software Production

Words are the essential substance from which software is built. But when we read a piece of source written in some of the programming languages, do we see words? In my daily practice of maintaining software I see ambiguous fragments and abbreviations:

• abs (absolute, abdomens, anti-lock brake system, ...)
• bg (background, bag, bad guy, ...)
• cb (callback, cable broadband, ...)
• db (database, decibel, ...)
• ext (external, extension, extra, ...)
• ...

It looks like software developers do not have the ability to write whole words. That is because the most destructive word in software production takes its toll, even after 4 decades. So, what is it? It is not "innovation", not "disruption", not "magic, it is

"Code"

I refer to "source code". Why was it named "code"? Code is meant to be something secret, a key to some safe, a military password. (Also "source" does not sound very descriptive to me, but at least it is not that destructive.)

So why do I call the word "code" destructive in relation with software production?

Any individual that somehow comes into contact with computer applications immediately is confronted with the word "code". Its meaning of secrecy becomes aware and leads to a wrong believe: that the source of software needs to be something secret. You need to decode when reading it. You need to encode when writing it. "Of course this is unreadable, I am a coder". Somehow this is similar to "official secrecy" (still used in many inauthentic democracies).

"Coded" code is much harder to read and understand than "normal language" code (using long names). It costs time, and the risk of mistakes is high. Remember that software maintenance makes up 70% of production efforts. That is why I call it destructive. Because commercial software projects consist of millions of lines of code.

"Why do you demand readability? I am a coder! I am not a journalist whose articles should become popular. I am expected to code knowledge into computers, this is a highly specialized ability, and experts like me don't have the time to think about being understandable. If you need changes, you will have to invest lots of time anyway."

You may have heard things like these. Unfortunately we must take it seriously.

We know that memory and hard disk space were quite restricted 30 years ago. People had to keep their source short to save space. So they used abbreviations in their programs wherever possible. That was the moment when others could not understand it any more, and it was "code". (I am sure there exist lots of explanations.) It looks like "coding" is a tradition that has become meaningless.

Conclusion

These times are over, and we need to step out of our technocratic attitude and think about the value software can generate for a society. Forget the autistic programmer. Become a social source publisher. Dare to be a techno-journalist, because that is what we software developers are. The word "code" leads to the assumption that software is for experts only. Technocracy can not be our future. We all need to write source, and it should be readable for everyone.