A critical programmer searches for professionalism

Abstract

The phrase "critical programmer" in this article's title is meant to be thought of as the programmer who carefully, respectfully, questions conventional wisdom. The particular conventional wisdom under consideration here (held mainly by those who do not write programs, as part of a team, for pay) to be critically thought about is the accountability of the software programmer, whether the programmer should alone be held strictly accountable for software faults, that if the programmer were provided a more rigorous education, if the programmer were to conduct him or herself in a more professional manner and held to a greater professional standard, that fewer software faults would result. The critical question is, is the premise valid? Should the programmer be the one solely held accountable for software faults? Would greater education and professionalism solve all software faults or only some, and if only some , then which ones ? The critical analysis that follows investigates these as well as other radical questions, (radical as in "root", not as in "revolutionary"), such as: What is accountability? What is trust? What is professionalism? Where do software faults come from, and What can be done?