Maybe Worf Was Right?

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis applied originally to spoken and written languages. It said, simply, that the language you use -- the constructs of your sentences and thoughts -- change the way you view the world. As far as I know, it's still open to discussion in the linguistic world.

Interestingly enough, this theory has also been applied to computer programming languages. The idea is that if you're a Java programmer you're always going to think of solutions in terms of Java language operations. Or if you're a database programmer, your solutions will always center on a database platform.

I both agree and disagree with this hypothesis. While I think that if you are "immersed" in a language, perhaps during a programming project, you are naturally going to start thinking in terms of that language. But this is just self-obvious clap-trap: if I speak English the words I use to express my thoughts are going to be English, right? Geesh.

Where I disagree is in the implication that this hypothesis has: languages make the programmer. Au contraire, mon ami. This confuses analysis with design. Analysis is exactly the art of describing problems in non-technical terms. The "problem space", as we call it, is the problem in terms of the customer. Design, on the other hand, is starting to turn that analysis into a solution. Does design involve language constructs? Absolutely. But saying that the language choice drives the solution is a far cry from the full-bodied, rich, aromatic, picture we are supposed to have of the software development process.

I think Worf had a point: where did I put that phaser?