Abstract Oriented ProgrammerPosted: June 15, 2011
Here’s a story I have heard many times about programmers.
“I asked Joe to write a simple bit of code to do <xyz>. It should have taken a few hours, maybe a day at worst. He took several days, he wrote a general framework that was far more complicated than we needed. Why does he keep over-engineering his code?”
It could be that Joe is an Abstract Oriented Programmer. Here’s a few snowclones…
If you often over-engineer your software, you might just be an Abstract Oriented Programmer.
If you spend more time thinking about tomorrow’s problems than today’s, you might just be an Abstract Oriented Programmer.
If you love looking for deeper patterns, get thrills from unconscious insight or talk in analogies, you might just be an Abstract Oriented Programmer.
Necessity of Abstraction
There are few applied professions that deal as heavily in abstractions as software development. Programming languages, data representations, graphical displays, control flows and so on are abstractions of the real world, abstractions of underlying hardware and often abstractions of abstractions.
The extraordinary performance growth of CPU’s (following Moore’s Law) demands abstractions. When I started out programming it was on computers with CPUs that had a transistor count in the thousands. The Motorola 6800 had 4,100 transistors clocked at 1-2MHz. The Zilog Z80 had 8,500 transistors clocked at 2-8MHz. Understanding CPU registers, interrupts and other quasi-physical details helped a great deal if you wanted to make these computers excel at something useful.
The latest mass-production CPUs have a billion or so transistors. Take the Intel Core i7 series which has around 1 Billion transistors and a clock speed in the 2-3.5Ghz range.
That’s roughly a billion times more computational capacity in 30 years. Human evolution hasn’t kept up. So we need to use a great deal of that increased CPU power to take advantage of that increased CPU power. That’s where compilers, virtual machines, advanced graphics, optimizers of many varieties, higher level programming languages and other programmer tools come in. There are layers upon layers of abstraction between the hardware and the software we write today. Indeed, they are a necessity.
So it’s not surprising that programming attracts people who are natural abstract thinkers … or perhaps that abstract thinkers are more likely to enjoy and succeed in programming.
But it can be easy to forget that not all people are abstract thinkers, or conclude that all programmers are abstract oriented, or incorrectly conclude that abstract thinking is always the best mode of thought.
- Considered apart from concrete existience, e.g. facts
- Not applied or practical; theoretical
- The process of formulating generalized ideas or concepts by extracting common qualities or patterns from specific examples
Abstractions are by definitions a simplification of information by taking lots of examples and condensing them into a pattern.
Some people naturally think in abstractions in contrast to others who tend to think more in the specific facts. Speaking abstractly, it’s about how people process information.
Consider the Myers Briggs Type Indicator which is widely used in business. The MBTI has four personality distinctions of which the “Intuitive” vs. “Sensing” (N vs. S in MBTI jargon) corresponds to Abstract vs. Concrete thinking. (There are other psychological assessments that have similar distinctions.)
The following tables lists some some of the tendencies exhibited by abstract and concrete thinkers.
Since most people adapt their behavior somewhat according to circumstance you can also read the table as tendencies when you are in an Abstract or Concrete frame of mind though most theories posit that you have a preferred tendency.
|Abstract / iNtuitive Tendencies||Concrete / Sensing Tendencies|
Let’s return to the story of Joe at the start of this post in which he over-engineers code. As an abstract oriented programmer there is a clear logic.
- Today’s problem is X.
- X is an example of a broader class of issues that also includes Y and Z.
- Since we might encounter Y and Z later I should write code that solves X, Y and Z.
But in the converse, asking Joe to solve only X when he knows it might fail in the future on problems Y and Z can leave him frustrated or concerned that he’ll be blamed in the future.
Context matters. Thinking ahead can make you a hero. Thinking ahead can make you a burden. Focussing on the immediate problem at hand can make you a hero … or a burden.
The trick is knowing what approach to take in each different circumstance: put simply, adapt.
And it can be important to discuss or confirm your approach with colleagues: simply, communicate.
Here are some common observations I’ve heard about Abstract Oriented Programmers…
|Abstract Oriented Programmers|
…and Concrete Oriented Programmers
|Concrete Oriented Programmers|
List A. How many of these describe you well? (It’s best not to overthink your answer. Go with your first impression.)
- You are more interested in a general idea than in the details of its realization
- You often think about humankind and its destiny
- You easily see the general principle behind specific occurrences
- You often contemplate about the complexity of life
- You think that almost everything can be analyzed
- You easily understand new theoretical principles
- You often spend time thinking of how things could be improved
- You easily perceive various ways in which events could develop
List B. How many of these describe you well?
- You get bored if you have to read theoretical books
- You tend to rely on your experience rather than on theoretical alternatives
- It’s essential for you to try things with your own hands
- When considering a situation you pay more attention to the current situation and less to a possible sequence of events
- As a rule, current preoccupations worry you more than your future plans
If you agree with more items in List A than List B then you might be Abstract Oriented.
Conversely, if you agree with items in List B more than List A then you might be the Sensing/Concrete type.
[A couple of cautions. First, type is not destiny. Life often requires us to adapt our behavior for family, work and friends etc. Second, it follows that depending upon context you might answer the questions differently. Third, this is about describing our internal thinking and it’s difficult to be objective about that.]
Years ago I heard a good analogy. You can be right-handed or left-handed. Most people have a preference and a few are ambidextrous. Just because somebody strongly prefers their right hand doesn’t mean their left hand is useless. Plus, some tasks require use of a particular hand: try using right-handed scissors with your left hand, or driving a manual car using the wrong hand on the gear stick.
We all have the ability to deal in facts and patterns but tend to have a relative strength. Similarly, there are tasks that favor each kind of thinking. It is my experience that programmers are stronger when they understand what their natural thinking mode is but learn to adapt according to the context.
Some examples that favor abstract and concrete thinking (and these are generalizations).
- User interface development can require attention to a multitude of details.
- Specifications benefit from broad thinking but can be strengthened with specific examples (as tests of generalizations; making it easier to read by providing concrete examples; ensuring that the generalizations don’t drift away from reality).
- Highly scalable systems and long-life architectures need abstractions.
- Object oriented programming is oriented to abstraction.
- Non-programming colleagues and customers might be concrete thinkers. An abstractionist talking to a “concretist” can be (mis-)perceived as having their head in the clouds. If you’re an abstractionist it is a good skill to communicate to others in their preferred language of specifics.
So it I is not my intention to state a preference for abstract or concrete thinking. Instead I am advocating self-awareness and learning flexibility in thinking and communication.
Being a strong abstractionist myself, I must conclude with a great piece of abstract thought.
“All generalizations are false, including this one.” Mark Twain
And Mark Twain was an Abstract Oriented Writer.
Psygrammer – Andrew Hunt