suralind

I just like my stack, which includes Go. That stack is of course ever changing, but why would I make a drastic change if I’m already both happy and somewhat good?

I’ve been recruiting people and had exposure to small sample of generalists as an interviewer, but also in a team. Not too long ago, I’ve been briefly exposed to „staff” level Go developers who, I kid you not, would not follow ANY known and widely accepted as best practice Go convention (that I could identify). Obviously these were Java, C#, Python developers bringing habits from their last language to that project and boy was it bad. I suppose that was an extreme end of the spectrum (they were also incredibly toxic), but not once before were I in a team where new code was that bad. Of course, best practices are there to serve you and not the other way around, but each time I’d ask, they couldn’t explain why in a coherent way.

I suppose once you know programming it’s kinda easy to change the syntax, but imo code is just significantly better if people know what they are doing.

I’ve been very happy using SvelteKit for some side projects. At this point I wouldn’t label myself as frontend developer anymore, but when done right, it’s probably the closest thing to modern, performant and reactive that I know of. It also works really well if the JS just breaks.

Love this website. Definitely bookmarking for future reference.

I can’t see how it would possibly work in Polish market. Polish job IT market (at least for Go developers) is very specific. There’s very few companies actually building their own products and plenty of software houses/hiring agencies looking to hire cheaply. I’ve been doing Go for long enough that what I ask for is on the higher end, so much so that I probably refuse ~95% offers because they are significantly below my expectations. Importantly, I’m no public figure nor I’m 10x developer, I’m just a regular guy who chose Go very early in my career, just before it really took off.

Now, imagine that I don’t ask for a number nor share my expectations. With 3-4 rounds of interviews, even if we assume 1/10 is in my range, I’d have to SUCCESSFULLY do maybe 30-40 interviews on average to find a job that matches my expectations. Another thing is that benefits in Poland are pretty standard almost nearly everywhere: private medical care, gym card, 20 vacation days, 10 sick days… unless you’re willing to work in the big few companies that just have unlimited money.

(If someone in Poland has different experience, please share - would love to hear more.)

$300kk valuation for git commits :) the bubble will pop at some point, I don’t know when, but boy will it be spectacular.

But where's the added value? You can book a meeting yourself. You can quickly add items to the freezer. Everything that was described in the article can be done in about the same amount of time as checking with Clawdbot. There are apps that track parcel delivery and support every courier service.

I think you are correct in your assessment. Both are important. If you're gonna have garbage code tests, you're gonna have garbage quality.

I find tests easier to write. Your function(s) may be hundred lines long, but the test is usually setup, run, assert.

I don't have much experience beyond writing unit/integration tests, but individual test cases seem to be simpler than the code they test (linear, no branches).

Did I say that you can't vibe code an app? I browse reddit and have seen the same apps as you did, I also vibe code myself every now and then and know what happens when you let it loose.

That's what I meant, it's either, or. Vibe coding definitely has a place for simple utilities or "in-house" tools that solve one problem. You can't vide code and learn (if you do, then it's not vibe coding as I define it).

I'm not saying my approach is correct, keep that in mind.

I care more about the code than the tests. Tests are verification of my work. And yes, there is a risk of AI "navigating around" bugs, but I found that a lot of the time AI will actually spot a bug and suggest a fix. I also review each line to look for improvements.

Edit: to answer your question, I will typically ask it to test a specific test case or few test cases. Very rarely will I ask it to "add tests everywhere". Yes, these tests frequently fail and the agent will fix on 2nd+ iteration after it runs the tests.

One more thing to add is that a lot of the time agent will add a "dummy" test. I don't really accept those for coverage's sake.

No surprise, really. You can use AI to explore new horizons or propose an initial sketch, but for anything larger than small changes - you must do a rewrite. Not just a review. An actual rewrite. AI can do well adding a function, but you can't vibe code an app and get smarter.

I don't necessarily think that writing more code means you get better coder. I automate nearly all my tests with AI and large chunk of bugfixing as well. I will regularly ask AI to propose an architecture or introduce a new pattern if I don't have a goal in my mind. But in these last 2 examples, I will always redesign the entire approach to be what I consider a better, cleaner interface. I don't recall AI ever getting that right, but must admit I asked AI in the first place cos I didn't know where to start.

If I had to summarize, I would say to let AI implement coding, but not API design/architecture. But at the same time, you can only get good at those by knowing what doesn't work and trying to find a better solution.

Oh man. Not saying this is not needed or anything, but it feels like Tailscale needed to pivot to something something AI… What a shitty time to be alive, companies doing good products that actually work well need to appeal to investors and do random things like that.

There's also zx (https://google.github.io/zx/). I use it every now and then and it's generally been a blast.

Definitely impressive. How many engineering hours did you need to build an MVP?

Thank you for sharing this. Well articulated.

So that's blue green with added version aware routing. What if you need to rollback? Good luck I guess.

But if you need to rename endpoint for example you need to route service A version Y to compatible version in service B. After changing the endpoint, now you need to route service A version Z to a new version of service B. Am I missing something? Meaning that it doesn’t truly mater whether you have 1 repo, 2 repos or 10 repos. Deployments MUST be done in sequence and there MUST be a backwards compatible commit in between OR you must have some mesh that’s going to take care of rerouting requests for you.

What’s the value proposition? I mean the fact that you have

- frontend - backend - website

is already confusing to me.

I understand that one commit seems nice, but you could have achieve this with e.g. 3 repos and very easily maintain all of them. There’s a bit of overhead of course, but having some experience working with a team that has a few „monorepos” I know that the cost to actually make it work is significant.

I still appreciate that you shared this even though other comments are correct that there isn’t much content on the page. Frankly speaking, more devs should put more thought into performance.

I’m currently working on a small e-commerce store for myself, written in SvelteKit (frontend) and Go (backend) and one of my core objectives is to make it fast. Not crazy fast, but looking for TTFB < 50-70ms for an average Polish user. Will definitely share it once it’s public.

My incomplete list:

- learn to sew clothes - improve my kitesurfing skills - I want to create and share more online - not to improve, but run more

This last bit is critical, I’ve been working on projects never really finishing them. I think part of that is I really, really dislike sharing unfinished things with strangers. The other part is that I struggle if something just works, I always want to make that perfect (when building for myself, ironically I’m usually the person to advocate for iterative approach). So this next year I’m going to focus more on improving that skill (already started this year).

I don’t really understand the hate he gets over this. If you want to thank someone for their contribution, do that yourself? Sending thank you from an ML model is anything but respectful. I can only imagine that if I got a message like that I’d be furious too.

This reminds me a story from my mom’s work from years ago: the company she was working for announced salary increases to each worker individually. Some, like my mom, got a little bit more, but some got a monthly increase around 2 PLN (about $0.5). At that point, it feels like a slap in the face. A thank you from AI gives the same vibe.

Good luck, always worried about stuff like that because it happened so many times and the product got worse eventually. At the same time, ai understand how much effort went into building something like Bun and people need to fund their life's somehow, so there's that.

Try https://github.com/maxbrunsfeld/counterfeiter

Love this write up. But also love the fact that the company pretty much uses the best solutions that they can (that definitely helps with hosting, regardless of cloud/self-host, but is impressive anyway). I’ve been a big Talos fan for couple years, but never worked with a client that would use something different than managed offering from their cloud provider.

Similarly, the fact that they are regularly updating Kubernetes, Talos and presumably other things means that these things are a normal flow and thus can optimize and automate. If you’re doing that because AWS is forcing you to upgrade… then it’s stressful.

I disagree with the point „don’t leave too many comments”. I think it’s easier to read a code that is a) following repo standards, b) following community standards. If a PR requires a 100 comments, so be it. Granted, I also almost always give a benefit of the doubt to the author unless a change is really required and I only ever seen a PR with close to a 100 comments once or twice. I should also say that you shouldn’t leave n comments with the same content so usually there’s no need for more than a couple comments in total.

I’ve been adopting jj for my personal projects for 1-2 months and have been very happy with it. One downside is if you move back to edit older revisions, it’s very easy to accidentally append something that was added to .gitignore in the meantime. I suppose it’s a relatively unique problem. Other than that I definitely like it, but my git knowledge accumulated over the years is still much larger than jj.

I’m going to be slowly adopting it for work.

I wonder how their nines are going. Guess they'll have to stay pretty stable for the next 100 years.

I laughed, thank you for this.

Nice project. I will forever be spoiled by Talos' simplicity.

Can someone explain how that worked? How was the CEO allowed to sell license AND talent to another company? Wouldn’t that screw investors? Why would they allow it if their stock becomes worthless after that?