Comments on: Building scientific tools that are actually useful http://www.programming4scientists.com/2009/08/04/building-scientific-tools-that-are-actually-useful/ Software development wisdom and common-sense for the scientist-programmer Sun, 28 Feb 2010 19:34:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Mailund on the Internet » Blog Archive » Last week in the blogs http://www.programming4scientists.com/2009/08/04/building-scientific-tools-that-are-actually-useful/comment-page-1/#comment-355 Mailund on the Internet » Blog Archive » Last week in the blogs Mon, 17 Aug 2009 05:41:35 +0000 http://www.programming4scientists.com/?p=578#comment-355 [...] Building scientific tools that are actually useful (Programming for scientists) [...] [...] Building scientific tools that are actually useful (Programming for scientists) [...]

]]> By: Marcin Cieslik http://www.programming4scientists.com/2009/08/04/building-scientific-tools-that-are-actually-useful/comment-page-1/#comment-354 Marcin Cieslik Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:23:36 +0000 http://www.programming4scientists.com/?p=578#comment-354 somehow extending reason 3 from Lars: Scientific software development is risky! The time you spend on making you software general, intuitive, robust and easy to use is most likely time you do not use for your research. This only pays of if a user-base or community develops around your code, but Building a community further requires time and skills. somehow extending reason 3 from Lars: Scientific software development is risky! The time you spend on making you software general, intuitive, robust and easy to use is most likely time you do not use for your research. This only pays of if a user-base or community develops around your code, but Building a community further requires time and skills.

]]> By: Lars Juhl Jensen http://www.programming4scientists.com/2009/08/04/building-scientific-tools-that-are-actually-useful/comment-page-1/#comment-353 Lars Juhl Jensen Thu, 13 Aug 2009 16:05:40 +0000 http://www.programming4scientists.com/?p=578#comment-353 I completely agree with you that making a robust, user-friendly, and well-supported tool is a good thing to do (provided that what the tool in useful in the first place). The big question is thus why do so few people actually make such tools? I think there are several reasons to this: 1) Skill sets. The people who are able to make the most useful tools are often those with a deep understanding of the scientific topic. However, they are often not good programmers. 2) Interests. The people who make the most useful tools are usually those who have a problem at hand that they want to solve. Fast. When they have made a hack that gets the job done they are happy. They are fundamentally interested in solving scientific problems, not in doing software development. 3) Rewards. Making a good tool will likely earn you kudos and reputation. But will it earn you tenure? I completely agree with you that making a robust, user-friendly, and well-supported tool is a good thing to do (provided that what the tool in useful in the first place). The big question is thus why do so few people actually make such tools?

I think there are several reasons to this:

1) Skill sets. The people who are able to make the most useful tools are often those with a deep understanding of the scientific topic. However, they are often not good programmers.

2) Interests. The people who make the most useful tools are usually those who have a problem at hand that they want to solve. Fast. When they have made a hack that gets the job done they are happy. They are fundamentally interested in solving scientific problems, not in doing software development.

3) Rewards. Making a good tool will likely earn you kudos and reputation. But will it earn you tenure?

]]>