000ooo000

It doesn't look like arse

Ban x because some people, who would undoubtedly struggle with y, struggle with x. Idiotic article.

..if it weren't so regularly rolled out by the ignorant.

I've lost interest in HN because it's seemingly only 50% posts about tech on any given day, and most of those are just one of the Thunderbongs of HN reposting some GitHub URL, or a half baked article from 2017. It wouldn't be so bad if the comments remained reasonable, but even those have tended towards the kind of fodder you get on Reddit, over the last year. I browse Lobsters instead if i'm thinking, but the HN habit is strong.

Despite the critical feedback you've received above, I found the article interesting, and having a homelab with several spare Pi's, it's got me considering setting a CA up. Thank you.

Once upon a time, a lot of software was released/available through "source forge", which is pretty self-explanatory in the context of software publishing. Then a decade ago, SourceForge shit the bed and destroyed its reputation. I'd bet that most of the developers saying they've never heard of "forge" in this context have entered in the industry in that time.

>a blanket statement pointing at CEOs en masse as the root of all problems

That's not what I said. Must've struck a nerve.. CEO by chance?

Classic CEO. "How can you, the powerless IC, fix an organisational problem? No, I mean without me having to do anything meaningful or risky"

Skip the article and just read the study (barely) linked in the second paragraph. I Ctrl+F'd for "dero" and was surprised/disappointed it wasn't mentioned by name.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/19485506114156...

(Sorry, don't have a nonpaywall link handy, but it's out there)

>Essentially, the PR a process at most tech companies is nothing more than a gatekeeping/complicance/CYA mechanism, and realizing this can definitely help your career..

It has value particularly when the team has newcomers or less-experienced developers. Writing it off as 'CYA' discards an opportunity for async feedback to be given on work.

If your PR isn't blocking someone nontechnical then I expect you to use developer tooling (i.e. VCS) to continue working without requiring that your PR be merged immediately, and I'll review the PR the next time I come to a natural break in my work. If it is blocking someone, then I'll review ASAP with consideration to the priority of whatever I'm working on.

I work with a guy who, until I said "calm down", would share his PR links in the team chat several times a day. He refused to learn rebase, or seemingly anything other than a standard Git workflow of checkout, commit, push, merge, repeat. He has since improved on both fronts.

Yeah.. Undergads leave school and are barely trusted to write CRUD apps.

The author's resume says he was a tech lead at Zendesk after 2.5 years of software development, with no formal software development qualifications. I'd be taking his perspectives with salt.

You know so little about the team, the organisation, the codebase, other concurrent obligations (e.g. prod support), and the way the project is run. The only way I can imagine one having confidence in a statement like "nothing should take that long" is naïveté.

>The core problem is that you’re deciding for yourself what the company needs instead of doing your job. Isn’t it your job to make your team run smoother? No! Your job is to execute the mission of your company’s leadership.

Such a massive oversimplification. If you spend more than 8 seconds thinking about this, it's obviously stupid.

>first, you’re inevitably going to burn out

Uhh, OK? So I should bump up against inefficiency rather than fix it, so I don't burn out? Ridiculous article. Wouldn't be surprised if this article started life as a LinkedIn post.

My theory is that devs like writing these articles because it implicitly means they're toward the better end of whatever made-up spectrum they're pushing. After all, why would anyone care for a weak engineer's thoughts on what makes a strong engineer?

100% with you on the latter point. It's a shame because, so far, where I've seen those, the author does actuallly seem to have some deep knowledge or something insightful to share. But man it's so hard to look past that awful delivery.

Not sure I agree with the idea that satisfying management disqualifies someone as dumb, but it's a decent point that at work, at the end of the day, we're just there to deliver what's expected of us, which adds some relevant perspective IMHO.

>Funny enough, now I write better code than I used to thanks to AI because of two reasons:

I assume you also believe you'll be one of the developers AI doesn't replace.

>People on the internet seem to have a problem differentiating between companies and human beings.

Naive. Companies are made of humans, and often bring out the worst in them. Fiduciary duty doesn't excuse shitty behaviour.

>*Jaguar Type 00 is a non-production vehicle

Unsure what your point is. I know that; the codebase I work on professionally has both. This thread is discussing the quality of the hooks API.

>you get weird stateful functions

This is one of the reasons I think hooks stink. It seems like they tried so hard to avoid using classes that they came up with an opaque, framework-only way to manage state so that they could declare "ha! Stateless functions at last!". The state's still there, it's always gonna be there, it's just now hidden behind an abstraction that has a few footguns.

Not GP. Started using React at work around 2017. The hooks API is just awful. Those complaints are extremely well-trodden ground at this point so I won't rehash. I'm using Lit.js for personal stuff instead these days. Shadow DOM isn't perfect but web components with Lit has been pretty low-surprise so far, which I can't say for Hooks React.

That's an ad

>One of these tests is the Big-Five Personality test. This test is a valid test and confirmed through hundreds of papers as reliable. This personality test was coined by Meyers-Briggs in the early 1900s and identified five major factors of personality: openness, extroversion, conscientiousness, neuroticism and agreeableness (Shiota, 2018, chapter 13)

Not my field, but this seems plain wrong. Did a bit of Googling and it doesn't sound like the Meyers-Briggs' had anything to do with Big 5?

This argument makes sense only if you think Git has, like, 2 uses.

Controlled by foldexpr in Neo/Vim IIRC, and I think VS proper has a shortcut Ctrl+M,Ctrl+O from memory. To round it out, VS Code has Ctrl+K+,Ctrl+2 where 2 is your level of folding of choice. Despite using these 3 editors every day and knowing the folding shortcut, I still don't collapse bodies as a matter of routine and I think I'd find it annoying if I had to toggle each open just to find relevant code.

There's also something to be said for the idea that code has a 2D shape to it and recognising parts visually can make navigating it a little easier if you're bouncing between a couple of areas for a particular change. I wouldn't want to obscure that, not by default anyway. But to each their own!

Thank you

Does the author mean peer review in the performance review context? Or code review?