Dumbing down code so it can be maintained by junior devs
-
GKP1992 wrote:
I would suggest educating the newer members of your team at least the "features" that are commonly used in the project.
Two things I've been noticing. There also seems to be a lack of motivation to learn from the senior people, and management is clueless so any "motivation" from that direction doesn't happen either. It seems that the young people nowadays have a different focus. The days of the "computer club" where people got together to learn things are long gone. Maybe in places like Google or Microsoft that kind of culture still exists, but I don't often see it in the "meat and potatoes" companies.
Latest Article - Building a Prototype Web-Based Diagramming Tool with SVG and Javascript Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
Marc Clifton wrote:
The days of the "computer club" where people got together to learn things are long gone.
Ahh the truth. It's usually unpleasant. But that's what CP is for, isn't it? :)
I am not the one who knocks. I never knock. In fact, I hate knocking.
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Why does the latest C++ 7 features make for a better product?
I never said that it did.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
I asked you to define robust, in reference to a robust product. Do so before making assumptions.
There was no assumption - just an inference based on your patronizing. The point here is to encourage engineers to write the best, most robust possible code. That does not necessarily mean using the very latest but most engineers will make it their business to both know about the latest developments and how they might fit it into their programming. You are welcome not to do that or to scoff at the idea of writing code that may cause junior devs to actually have to think and learn but they will not improve unless they challenge themselves. Writing dumbed-down code is dumb.
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer. The End
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote:
I never said that it did.
But that is what this thread is about.
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote:
Writing dumbed-down code is dumb
Try working in the Kernel.... I write the simplest code I can. Laid out in the clearest fashion possible. Writing dumbed down code is clever. KISS, every heard of that? Throwing the latest 'must have' in the code, and making it unmaintainable by anyone without knowledge of that 'must have' is dumb. And it isnt just junior devs who fall foul of this stupidity, it is ANY dev who hasnt used that particular 'must have'. Like so many devs you evidently fall into the trap of believing the code is the product. It isnt. It is a representation of machine code. That is all. All languages produce machine code. Of course to remind you that at the end of the day VB achieves just the same as your precious wont be welcome, but that's a fact.
-
You're not going to carve that table legs by hand with a rusty blade and charge customers 40 hours for each leg, are you? Hey it's made by hand and antique so the cost would be expensive. Most customers wouldn't pay for it. :)
Is C++3 a rusty blade?
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Is a carpenters job to make furniture, or to use the latest saw, plane, and screwdriver?
To make furniture. But...when the hand-me-down tools are worn out, or there's a more efficient tool, or a specialized tool for just that particular requirement, then one should not try to "get away" with using "the wrong" tool. :) [edit]And often, a new tool requires training. And new safety protocols! :laugh: [/edit]
Latest Article - Building a Prototype Web-Based Diagramming Tool with SVG and Javascript Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
Marc Clifton wrote:
worn out,
C++ 3 is worn out is it?
Marc Clifton wrote:
specialized tool for just that particular requirement
How does a customer requirement dictate that C++7 should be used in preference to C++3?
-
Ever been asked to do this? I seem to be encountering this more and more -- the last company I worked for, I left because that was stated explicitly by the CTO as the new policy. What would you do if you were told to do that? And by dumbing down, I mean doing things like avoiding LINQ (except for basic things), metadata, reflection, extension methods, and any of the C# 7.0 language features. It seems that long gone are the days when companies actually invest in keeping developer skills up to par with the technologies the company uses. Or even more amusingly (not) keeping those technologies up to date.
Latest Article - Building a Prototype Web-Based Diagramming Tool with SVG and Javascript Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
KISS Sure you know what that means, and it applies to everything.
-
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote:
I never said that it did.
But that is what this thread is about.
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote:
Writing dumbed-down code is dumb
Try working in the Kernel.... I write the simplest code I can. Laid out in the clearest fashion possible. Writing dumbed down code is clever. KISS, every heard of that? Throwing the latest 'must have' in the code, and making it unmaintainable by anyone without knowledge of that 'must have' is dumb. And it isnt just junior devs who fall foul of this stupidity, it is ANY dev who hasnt used that particular 'must have'. Like so many devs you evidently fall into the trap of believing the code is the product. It isnt. It is a representation of machine code. That is all. All languages produce machine code. Of course to remind you that at the end of the day VB achieves just the same as your precious wont be welcome, but that's a fact.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Like so many devs you evidently fall into the trap of believing the code is the product
I've been at this far too long to believe that. But I do believe I have a duty to write the best possible code to get the job done. If the latest incarnation visual widgets 35 help me do that, then I'll use it.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Of course to remind you that at the end of the day VB achieves just the same as your precious <insert your cherished tool here> wont be welcome, but that's a fact.
The vast majority of our current code base is VB.Net and whilst what you say might be true, working with it feels like using a screwdriver as a hammer.
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer. The End
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Like so many devs you evidently fall into the trap of believing the code is the product
I've been at this far too long to believe that. But I do believe I have a duty to write the best possible code to get the job done. If the latest incarnation visual widgets 35 help me do that, then I'll use it.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
Of course to remind you that at the end of the day VB achieves just the same as your precious <insert your cherished tool here> wont be welcome, but that's a fact.
The vast majority of our current code base is VB.Net and whilst what you say might be true, working with it feels like using a screwdriver as a hammer.
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer. The End
I think we agree, in principle, so do you also agree that using weird and esoteric features of a language is stupid? For example, and I forget the name, the ## stuff in C++.
-
I think we agree, in principle, so do you also agree that using weird and esoteric features of a language is stupid? For example, and I forget the name, the ## stuff in C++.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
do you also agree that using weird and esoteric features of a language is stupid?
Unless it is the best way to accomplish a task. But probably not unless I can see a benefit.
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer. The End
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
do you also agree that using weird and esoteric features of a language is stupid?
Unless it is the best way to accomplish a task. But probably not unless I can see a benefit.
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer. The End
So, does C++7 allow you to implement a requirement any better than C++3?
-
So, does C++7 allow you to implement a requirement any better than C++3?
I have not used c++ in over 15 years!
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer. The End
-
I have not used c++ in over 15 years!
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer. The End
C# eh? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: (Sorry, couldnt help it. Snigger snigger...) Because a change to the language is to make life *easier* for the programmer. So smart pointers, well, thats because they are too lazy to put deletes in the exception handlers. Garbage collection? Thats because they are too lazy to put deletes anywhere. Not that these are bad features, but they dont improve the product. (In fact some make it worse, like garbage collection. Ever wondered why code these days is so big, and uses so much memory?) The manager in the OP was absolutely right. If you dont control your nerdy devs they will fuck the product up with complexity and shite features, ,just because they like playing with new toys. (This is why so many devs are NOT engineers). And that explains why 'oldversion.com' exists, because devs fucked it up. The manager is right to put a tight rein on them.
-
C# eh? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: (Sorry, couldnt help it. Snigger snigger...) Because a change to the language is to make life *easier* for the programmer. So smart pointers, well, thats because they are too lazy to put deletes in the exception handlers. Garbage collection? Thats because they are too lazy to put deletes anywhere. Not that these are bad features, but they dont improve the product. (In fact some make it worse, like garbage collection. Ever wondered why code these days is so big, and uses so much memory?) The manager in the OP was absolutely right. If you dont control your nerdy devs they will fuck the product up with complexity and shite features, ,just because they like playing with new toys. (This is why so many devs are NOT engineers). And that explains why 'oldversion.com' exists, because devs fucked it up. The manager is right to put a tight rein on them.
Munchies_Matt wrote:
C# eh?
Yes, c++ was too simple - needed more of a challenge. ;P
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer. The End
-
Munchies_Matt wrote:
C# eh?
Yes, c++ was too simple - needed more of a challenge. ;P
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer. The End
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote:
Yes, c++ I was too simple - needed more too much of a challenge.
FIFY. I take your lack of response as implicit agreement about the rest of my post. ;P
-
R. Giskard Reventlov wrote:
Yes, c++ I was too simple - needed more too much of a challenge.
FIFY. I take your lack of response as implicit agreement about the rest of my post. ;P
Munchies_Matt wrote:
I take your lack of response as implicit agreement about the rest of my post
If that makes you feel better...
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer. The End
-
You sound like the type of boss I would like to work for!
If your company is in central Texas and you are hiring, please tell me! I would be delighted to apply!
__________________ Lord, grant me the serenity to accept that there are some things I just can’t keep up with, the determination to keep up with the things I must keep up with, and the wisdom to find a good RSS feed from someone who keeps up with what I’d like to, but just don’t have the damn bandwidth to handle right now. © 2009, Rex Hammock