This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation
I doubt there's any significant connection. The derivation is from "tape monkey", which was a systems administrator on an old system that used reel-to-reel tapes. The admin's job was primarily to swap tapes out as needed to load the approprite programs and/or data, and the joke was that the job could be performed equally as well by a trained monkey. There is a recent jargon term (a decade old) that does have a close association with the infinite monkey theorem, but the association is parallel, not derivative. In a 1995 Dilbert strip, Dilbert asks Ratbert to do "his little rat dance" on the keyboard to produce bugs for Dilbert to fix (as the PHM had offered a per-bug bounty for fixes). Rather than creating bugs, Ratbert accidentally authors a web browser. See http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/R/rat-dance.html for more. scot18:23, 22 April 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 19 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
There's a whole bunch of repetitions in the text. User:Dalen_talas 12/05/2006
I've tightened up the text and provided references for as much as I can, so I'm going to yank the cleanup tag based on that work. scot14:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
Needs a bit of a rewrite
Latest comment: 8 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion
The definition given here is only true at the strictest level - the commonly used variation is just a humorous reference. Additionally, there are parts here that are a bit too elitest and could use a bit of cleaning. :) The base definition is pretty well explained though, so good work :). Just another star in the nightT | @ | C21:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)Reply
Well, being an elitest who accuses anyone not a hard-core toolsmith of being a code monkey, I wouldn't know :) It seems to me that even the VB weenies consider themselves to be "1337 h4x0r d00dz" and would take offense at being called code monkeys, whereas in my view, use of VB automatically makes one a code monkey (as I recall the language has no shift operators--ever tried to write a shift without access to the CPUs shift operator? "Glacial" isn't slow enough to get the point across). It's all relative, which I think is the point the article should make. scot22:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)Reply
Maybe so but your personal definition of code monkey is at odds with those mentioned here. The term doesn't usually imply anything about what kind of programming the person does or how close to the metal they get. I still self-deprecatingly call myself a code monkey but professionally I really stopped being one when I moved from a software developer role, to a software architect role (now consultant) although the technologies I've used to do the actual work haven't changed. Code monkey is the term for the grunt programmer who does the bulk of the work, as opposed to the senior developer/architect who, contrary to your definition, does less programming and probably in practise is not as sharp as the code monkey.
As for VB, what do you expect from managed code? It's questionable with today's processing power whether you even need direct CPU access for games anymore, let alone rapid applications development which is where VB/.net fits in nicely. --JamesTheNumberless11:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)Reply
I think self-derogatory use of "code monkey" might be similar: How black/darker/whatever people call themselves "nigga" or "negrata", how nerd and geek became derogatory terms to a proud adjective. it's some kind of satirical and sarcastic usage to generate resilience. Timofonic (talk) 19:13, 19 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
merge web monkey into this article
Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Agreed, if it is established that "web monkey" is a subset of "code monkey"--maybe have a sub-section covering code monkey variants? Since the original was tape monkey, that should probably form the intro, and the article one-banana problem can be merged in as well. scot20:37, 11 April 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
The etymology might lie in the UK/Australian term grease monkey.
That term is used in the US as well, and that may be the root of the original "tape monkey" use. That should probably be mentioned there. scot14:00, 26 April 2006 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
I'm not sure about the following:
The term can also apply to amateur computer programmers who stitch together snippets of code found on the internet and in books to make an application, without having an appreciation or understanding what the principles behind the code or the concept of coding are.
To me, it sounds more like code monkey. To me a script kiddie only uses others tools. As far as I know they don't build their own tools from snippets. 216.36.188.184 (talk) 11:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Reply
No, it shows an anti-BASIC bias; VB just happens to be the dominant form of BASIC, and therefore the one most commonly used by code monkeys. The fact that VB is evil is beside the point (if you don't believe me, try doing bitwise operations in it...) scot16:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Oh, please. The bitwise operators keep getting dragged in. If you need to do a lot of bit twiddling, use your favorite C derivative, that's what it's there for. VB can get along with the occasional multiplication and division by powers of two (which the compiler can optimize into shifts, by the way, if they're constant). If you're at the point where you're optimizing bit shifts, you're surely doing something that the average Visual Basic programmer wouldn't even be considered for, so what the language does is a lot less relevant.
VB (not VB.NET) is bletcherous, but it's not half as evil as people make it out to be. The cargo cult programming culture surrounding it is much worse. That's not necessarily BASIC-specific either; anything simple enough to be (partially) memorized and abused by code monkeys (mostly scripting languages) will suffer that fate. 82.95.254.24923:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I am removing the entire derogatory use section for now since it is practically unsourced, reference 2 is a jargon file link to script kiddie, and ref 3 which seems to be really the reference the entire section seems to be based on references code jockey which is a separate term and even then it is not a great reference for an entire integral paragraph. Cat-five - talk01:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Reply
Disambiguation might become ambiguous too. Some names are a derivation of the "code monkey" jargon term too: Do they deserve separate pages this way or mention it in the "code monkey" article? Timofonic (talk) 19:32, 19 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
Content Disclaimer
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.
The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.