[nadam]

"being capable of quickly shifting registers from the large picture to small details and back again — relies on the strong memory" Something like that, yes. Just huge memory and fast processor. And unfortunatelly it is just talent, after 10-15 years in the profession you will see your limits: your programing skills can be developed further and further to be very good, but it cannot be developed to be really great. I am a good programmer, but not a great one. When I was young, I thought I am great (winning some small math competitions when I was a child helped to develop this false belief), but now I know I am just good: I don't have that incredible brain power (memory + speed). But I am not depressed: being good is also fun, and anyway programming is not my identity: my identity is more a combination of software product design + programming.

[hutteman]

I would agree that greatness in part depends on a certain innate talent, and most of us, no matter how hard we may try, will never get there.

I think the difference between his categorization of "Good programmers" and its subcategory of "Really good programmers" is the more interesting one though. Too many programmers seem to lack (or have lost) that drive to continually improve themselves, having become content with treating programming as nothing more than a 9-to-5 job during which they do little more than apply past knowledge. Like the article states, doing this puts them "at risk of slipping into the lower grouping by letting their skills atrophy".

The "Really good programmers" on the other hand are the ones with drive, with motivation; the ones that at least aspire for greatness even if they might stall out at merely being "very good". Every great programmer was once just a "Really good programmer", but you can't go from good to great without that passion.

[beersigns]

I'm on board with this statement. I've realized for quite awhile that there are some guys who are just on another level in terms of sheer ability. Sadly I am not one of them.

I've run across a fair number of the 9-5 guys who used to be really good/good & use that as motivation to never allow it to happen to me. Always gotta push forward.

[pcopley]

I would hope your identity was more closely linked to friends, family and hobbies than your career, regardless of how much you enjoy what you do.

[waterlesscloud]

I can by the friends and family portion, but why would it be better to have your identity linked to your hobbies than to your career?

[AlexandrB]

Because you have more control over your hobbies. At the end of the day, the success of your career is (at least in part) dependant on luck and the decisions of others.

[nostrademons]

Not in programming, which is one of the few lucrative careers where you can do it just as well as a hobby.

[pcopley]

I think most people are more likely to work at a job they dislike and spend their weekends on their own endeavors than the other way around, that's all.

[nadam]

Definitely much of my identity is linked to my family (especially since my children have been born).