Do engineers and programmers care about concepts like beauty and elegance? Should they? Designers have always known that looks matter—that the outside (interface) matters. But deep in the heart of those building the inside—the technology most users never see—lies the sensibility of an artist. In a kind of “Design Eye for the Code Guy” way.
…
“He was telling me how he feels like he has to sit and tweak his code over and over until it not only acts right, but looks right. It cannot be merely functional, it must be beautiful, as well.”But the best part was a comment by “Morten” that included the line:
“As for spending too much time on making the code look right down to the last indentation - my code has been called “girl code” for the same reason…”
…
“The best computer scientists are, like [Henri] Vaillancourt, technologists who crave beauty.
There is the ever-present danger when you discuss beauty in science, mathematics, and technology that readers will assume the word is being used metaphorically… And could a mathematical proof, scientific theory, or piece of software be “beautiful” in the real, literal way that a painting or symphony or rose can be beautiful?
Yes.”…
These principles, beautiful in themselves, will set the stage for the next technological revolution, in which the pursuit of elegance will lead to extraordinary innovations.”
Although I’ve never spoken of it, I agree with the premise of this article 100%.
I have spent countless hours perfecting not only the functionality of a program but the beauty of the design and implementation. This is the 21st century, code should be presented elegantly — the days of spaghetti code are (or at least, should be) behind us.
