Is Programming Art?

chromatic writes "A constant question for software developers is 'What is the nature of programming?' Is it art or science? Does creativity or engineering lead the design and implementation of a program? John Littler talked to several well-known and well-respected programmers (including Guido van Rossum, Andy Hunt, Bjarne Stroustrup, Paul Graham, and Richard Stallman) to find their answers; he shares their thoughts and his own in Art and Computer Programming." From the article: "What the heck is art anyway, at least as most people understand it? What do people mean when they say 'art'? A straw poll showed a fair degree of consensus--art is craft plus a special degree of inspiration. This pretty much explains immediately why only art students and art critics at a certain sort of paper favor conceptual art. Conceptual art, of course, often lacks a craft component as people usually understand the term."

Comments

Not a fine art

[fembots]

I think Richard Stallman put it quite nicely:

"I would describe programming as a craft, which is a kind of art, but not a fine art. Craft means making useful objects with perhaps decorative touches. Fine art means making things purely for their beauty."

When you have to take functionality into account, it often kills the artistic side of the creation.

Re:Not a fine art

[SIGALRM]

Since programming is an art, we ought to be able to classify types of programmers. Here is a start;

The Picasso programmer: As a whole the system works, but each piece is a warped view of reality.

The Jackson Pollack programmer: Throws code at the system, trying to see what works.

The Georges Seurat programmer: When you step back from the system, you can see the overall pattern, but close up each piece is totally distinct from all of the others. (Actually, this is a pretty good description of OO design).

The Michalangelo programmer: Has a grand, sweeping view of what the system should do, but each piece is done in such meticulous detail that it takes years to finish anything.

Re:Not a fine art

[ShaniaTwain]

When you have to take functionality into account, it often kills the artistic side of the creation.

That would mean that architecture, furniture design, etc lacks in the artistic side? I dont think this is the case at all - giving something functionality doesnt remove the artistic side, they complement each other and are not mutualy exclusive.

It's engineering

[Anonymous Coward]

Same as usual, a bridge can be beautiful to look at, beautiful in how it copes with it's load etc, same as code, it's just people don't like looking at code as engineering for some reason.

CS is science. Design is art

[AuMatar]

Computer science- the concepts of bits and bytes and memory addresses is a science. There is a right and wrong answer for pretty much everything. Its researchable and falsifiable.

The design of a computer program is an art. There is no defined standard for what is or is not good design, its not falsifiable. And its not something that can be taught by rote in a college course. Picking the right design for your specifications and requirements is an art, and one that too few people really understand.