Deciding whether to disclose neurodivergence at work is hard; disclosing can lead to positive outcomes, but also to stigma or job insecurity.These outcomes are hard to predict and not well understood.Accordingly, neurodivergent workers turn to online communities, which may not inform well-calibrated disclosure decisions.We conducted a mixed-methods study on disclosure of neurodivergence in software workplaces.We focus on software workplaces because neurodivergence is prevalent there, and they present unique interactions for disclosure.We compare community perceptions on r/ADHD_Programmers with a worldwide survey of 493 software engineers.Synthesizing these perspectives, we constructed a model of disclosure in our context, uncovering the cost-benefit analyses of disclosure, disclosure outcomes, and the influence of mental health.We found that workplace disclosure is often motivated by social support and outcomes are predominantly positive.We conclude with a call for future interventions, including technologies, to optimize disclosure decisions.

Understanding the work styles of diverse programmers can help build inclusive workplaces, enabling all software engineers to excel. An estimated 10.6 % of programmers have Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), a condition characterized by differences in attention and working memory. Prior work has just begun to explore the impact of ADHD on software development, finding that inadequate support may negatively impact team productivity and employment. This prevents software organizations from benefiting from ADHD-related strengths. To investigate these impacts, we conducted a two-phase mixed methods study. First, we qualitatively analyzed 99 threads (1,658 posts and comments) from r/ADHD_Programmers, the largest public forum dedicated to the ADHD programmer community. We constructed a mapping that reveals how ADHD programmers apply personal strategies and organizational accommodations to address software task-specific challenges. Second, we conducted a large-scale survey of 239 ADHD and 254 non-ADHD professional programmers to validate how our qualitative data generalize to the worldwide developer population. Our results show that ADHD programmers are 1.8 to 4.4 times more likely to struggle more frequently than neurotypical developers with all challenges we consider, but especially with time management and design. Our findings have implications for inclusive and effective tooland policy-building in software workplaces and motivate further research into the experiences of ADHD programmers.

Anecdotal evidence of cannabis use by professional programmers abounds. Recent studies have found that some professionals regularly use cannabis while programming, even for work-related tasks. However, accounts of the impacts of cannabis on programming vary widely and are often contradictory. For example, some programmers claim that it impairs their ability to generate correct solutions, while others claim it enhances creativity and focus. There remains a need for an empirical understanding of the true impacts of cannabis on programming. This paper presents the first controlled observational study of cannabis's effects on programming ability. Based on a within-subjects design with over 70 participants, we find that, at ecologically valid dosages, cannabis significantly impairs programming performance. Programs implemented while high contain more bugs and take longer to write (p < 0.05) --- a small to medium effect (0.22 ≤ d ≤ 0.44). We also did not find any evidence that high programmers generate more divergent solutions. However, programmers can accurately assess differences in their programming performance (r = 0.59), even when under the influence of cannabis. We hope that this research will facilitate evidence-based policies and help developers make informed decisions regarding cannabis use while programming.