How DEFINITELY not to CV
-
making a stinker of a project doesn't make you a bad programmer.
No. Writing lots of bad code indicates that you might be a bad programmer, though. Or even writing lots of very good, but unsupportable, code.Atwood and chums seem to think the fact nobody understands their codebase1 is, in some way, a good thing. Here's a hint, Jeff. It's not a good thing at all. They've produced an open sores product that is close-to-impossible to fix.
Another hint that you might be a bad programmer is that you have no idea about testing. Or that you have no idea what a bug tracker should be used for. Or that you can't distinguish a bug tracker from a forum system.
1 Discourse's codebase is not merely "complex", either. I write rails code, have done since 2006, and I find Discourse2 utterly impenetrable.
2 Yes, I did actually try fixing some of the bugs, early on.
-
-
What if you've been fumbling every catch for 3 years? You think the Seahawks would still have you on the payroll?
If they have a rich sponsors and the audience keeps coming, sure, why not?
The main thing a good software developer is, in my mind, is well-rounded. Anybody who spends all their time hanging around with other programmers is almost certainly not that.
All of us are spending time with other programmers.
Are we then bad hires?
-
All of us are spending time with other programmers.
Are we then bad hires?
Probably.
-
-
True. Also, you should carefully read licence agreements before you click OK.
Of course, in practice, no one cares about that crap. Especially in a small business world in which I operate.
I dare you, on Monday morning, to go tell your boss that whatever contracts you sign with him (including the NDA) are a joke, and that you feel like disregarding them. Have a laugh. Post how it goes.
Cartman82: People who study all the time get better grades than slackers
Blakeyrat: NO! NOT TRUE! WHERE ARE THE RESEARCH PAPERS!? WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE!?? I REFUSE TO BELIEVE IT!!!Nope, siding with Blakey on this one. Especially given the example you gave.
People who do nothing but study can very easily get worse grades than a perceived slacker. The keener overworks themselves. A tired brain absorbs no new information. They are studying hard, but not smart. They are cramming info but not learning concepts. If they don't get a good night's sleep, they can't commit what they've studied into long term memory. They aren't socializing, so they don't have a study network. They aren't doing hobbies, so they may be low in exercise and sunlight exposure, leading to poor healthy and thus, poor academic performance.
While the slacker may be doing just the amount of studying they need to do. They've allocated time each day to do a bit so they aren't cramming at the last minute. They are eating, exercising and sleeping right, helping with long term recall. They aren't stressed about school all the time. They have friends to discuss concepts with.
There is an entire spectrum there-- it's more like two axis. Slacker TO Studying-hound on one, and Not Learning TO Learning on the other.
The exact same thing applies to someone who does or doesn't have a hobby of programming, and who is or isn't a good coder. There's tons of other factors you aren't even taking into account. So yes, @blakeyrat is perfectly correct in calling bullshit and demanding data.
-
Even if I agreed that Discourse is a total failure (which it obviously isn't), making a stinker of a project doesn't make you a bad programmer.
No, but making a forum project that costs 10x the amount of an entire e-commerce website, and that is absolutely unmaintainable without long-term and costly support contracts (which still don't deliver any promise of fixing bugs, or not introducing new ones, or not breaking data)-- THAT would make you an unhirable programmer.
"I can make you the product you want, for 100x the cost you're willing to spend, that will consume all your future time and resources in having me maintain it. Oh, and it'll become the product I want rather than the product you need. Want to hire me?"
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
I dare you, on Monday morning, to go tell your boss that whatever contracts you sign with him (including the NDA) are a joke, and that you feel like disregarding them. Have a laugh. Post how it goes.
I never signed any contracts with him, including the NDA. Whatever contracts he submitted for the government, he probably just falsified my signature and didn't bother me with that crap.
So the joke's ON YOU!
Filed under: You guys really REALLY don't understand the disconnect between our two worlds
@Lorne_Kates said:
Nope, siding with Blakey on this one. Especially given the example you gave.
Damn! Everyone's disagreeing with me today!
Am I out of touch?
No! It's the world that's wrong!
@Lorne_Kates said:
There is an entire spectrum there-- it's more like two axis. Slacker TO Studying-hound on one, and Not Learning TO Learning on the other.
Yeah, but you're still trying to convince me that investing more work into something will not produce better results. Which, baring crazy examples of exerting yourself to the point of exhaustion, is just bullshit.
It's the laws of physics man. The only way to get better at something is to work. Work work work, read, learn, think, type, work some more. The more hours you put into it, the better you get.
I get it why these "life-work balance" wives tales appeal to you guys. They appeal to me too.
But let's face the truth. If instead of spending my whole evening bullshitting on TDWTF (or watching TV, or playing with my kids or whatever) I spent working on my hobby projects, I'd be a little bit better programmer now. But I didn't.
Some other guy or gal did, though. Repeat that evening after evening, month after month, and they will have created a hot new OSS library, or written a popular article, or expand their professional reputation with clients or whatever. While we won't.
And that's OK. We don't have to. We can chose to have other hobbies, spend time with families, whatever makes us happy. It's fine, really.
But let's not pretend that makes us just as good programmers as they are. Because we are not.
-
hiring conditions at my hypothetical firm: 'weighs over 100kg'
I've always wanted to have a good reason to eat more instead of less.
But let's face the truth. If instead of spending my whole evening bullshitting on TDWTF (or watching TV, or playing with my kids or whatever) I spent working on my hobby projects, I'd be a little bit better programmer now.
I'm not sure about that. The brain needs some time to rest to work well. Constant stress/work doesn't exactly improve your skills. Going back to your previous example: In my second year of university, I experimented with different studying techniques. I eventually found out that my grades were significantly better if I studied less and spent my evenings with my friends instead of my books.
-
All of us are spending time with other programmers.
Key difference between what @blakeyrat said and what you said: the word all. I may spend time here, but it isn't anywhere near all my time.
-
Would have been a quick link, but it's topical here:
http://foorious.com/blog/2014/10/work-life-balance/
Another guy who disagrees with me. What's wrong with people today!?
-
-
@RaceProUK said:
But by all means don't let the truth get in the way of your hate-fuelled narrative.
That seems to be the motto of this forum lately. Are we still counting flamewars, BTW? Can't find that topic anymore.
I think we lost count when a certain incendiary fox moved in to the neighbourhood...
-
we're talking about being a good software developer.
The main thing a good software developer is, in my mind, is well-rounded. Anybody who spends all their time hanging around with other programmers is almost certainly not that.
There are research papers that show that in order to learn programming you need to spend time at the keyboard. More time → more learning (for entry level programming skills). Not going to go looking for them for you, though.
It is not unreasonable to assume that the same holds true for advanced programming skills (whatever that means) too, even if I agree with you (to save my own ass, if nothing else), that extramural activities other than programming are also important (no scientific proof of that either though).
-
The problem is "advanced programming skills" is "creating abstracted bullshit that doesn't help solve your problem and nobody can maintain".
I'd much rather work with someone who has basic programming skills, but advanced organizational skills. Most programmers love complexity. Fuck them.
-
The problem is "advanced programming skills" is "creating abstracted bullshit that doesn't help solve your problem and nobody can maintain".
I disagree. The problem is not design/architectural patterns, the problem is that they're taught wrong. And that there are people to whom everything looks like a nail.
I'd much rather work with someone who has basic programming skills, but advanced organizational skills.
I hope you never throw a complicated problem at such a person. The results might be horrible.
Most programmers love complexity. Fuck them.
I like complexity, because it's challenging to break down a complex problem into different components that are easily solvable, while minimizing the complexity of the interaction between the components. What I don't like is complex software, because if the software itself is complex, it's badly designed.
-
-
Then fuck you.
Because I like being challenged? Did you even read the rest of my post?
-
I don't give a shit why you like complexity, it leads to shitty unmaintainable software.
-
it leads to shitty unmaintainable software.
Ok, so you neither read nor understood my post. Thanks for clarifying.
-
"People who love complexity, fuck them."
"I love complexity."
"Fuck you!"
"WHAAA you didn't read my post tho??!??!
-
Because I like being challenged? Did you even read the rest of my post?
There's a huge difference between complexity and a complex problem.
-
Ummm… last time I checked, complex is the adjective associated with complexity. And the fact that complexity in the problem doesn't necessarily make software that solves it complex and hard to maintain was exactly my point?!
-
Ummm… last time I checked, complex is the adjective associated with complexity. And the fact that complexity in the problem doesn't necessarily make software that solves it complex and hard to maintain was exactly my point?!
Tell me the difference between a motorcycle, and a Complicator's Bicycle.
-
"People who love complexity, fuck them."
"I love complexity."
You were referring to complex, unmaintainable software, I was referring to complex problems. My post actually agrees with you:
if the software itself is complex, it's badly designed.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Tell me the difference between a motorcycle, and a Complicator's Bicycle.
Tell me the difference between Discourse and forum software.
-
They break in different ways, for one...
-
Tell me the difference between Discourse and forum software.
One of them is forum software, the other is discourse.
-
Ummm… last time I checked, complex is the adjective associated with complexity.
But the two aren't necessarily linked.Computers may seem complex, but really all they do all day every day is add two numbers together, and copy a number from one place to another. Yet from those two simple operations, you get everything from
catto Grand Theft Auto V.
-
But the two aren't necessarily linked.
Yes, and no, depending on how your definition of each. If you use "complex" to refer to apparent complexity and "complexity" to refer to the actual complexity of the best possible solution, then of course they mean something different. But the inherent meaning of both words is the same.
-
Hence my use of the word 'necessarily'
-
I'm still confused how someone could have possibly misunderstood the words "complexity" and "complex" in my reply to blakey:
complex problem
complex software
I was clearly talking about the two different kinds of complexity, and that I liked one but not the other, wasn't I?
-
Don't get me wrong, I understand the difference; I was just commenting on the semantics of the English words themselves ;)
-
semantics of the English words themselves
And now I'm confused.
Are you telling me that, in English, a noun and its adjective can mean different things by default?
-
Another guy who disagrees with me. What's wrong with people today!?
I agree with your sentiments. Having code to show is a good sign. If you don't have code to show you're either insecure about it or you don't care much about the profession. Both possibilities are not very encouraging.
But then I work at a very small company and at another place which could be characterized as a startup. Lots of code I write is pushed to a well-known social code-sharing website. Some other code is served as unadulterated JS to the public, which in some cases would be highly embarrassing if it could be traced to me
-
Are you telling me that, in English, a noun and its adjective can mean different things by default?
It's all down to context ;)
-
It's all down to context
Phew. For a moment, I though I was either going insane or had forgotten how languages worked. :D
-
you don't care much about the profession
Option 3: You do care about the profession, but prefer learning new stuff (by reading, because that's how you learn best) to having side projects?
-
The main thing a good software developer is, in my mind, is well-rounded. Anybody who spends all their time hanging around with other programmers is almost certainly not that.
Yeah, they should also spend plenty of time playing video games and watching TV.
-
complexity.
"Complexity is a term you use when you don't know what's going on." -- Prof. Hans van Vleet, in a lecture on software maintenance.
His argument was that if you start asking what people mean when they say that a piece of software is complex, they usually tell you that it's got high branching, low comment-to-code ratio, lots of arithmetics, etc. So use these measures instead when assessing a maintenance effort.
Filed under Relevance to the current discussion? What's that?
-
I think in a lot of cases, complexity comes from the developer not knowing enough about the problem he's solving. If you don't know which rules the Federal Government is likely to change in the next 5 years, and which they aren't, you might decide to make literally everything configurable. Well that adds a huge amount of complexity for the 90% of those things that'll never change.
-
Option 3: You do care about the profession, but prefer learning new stuff (by reading, because that's how you learn best) to having side projects?
Okay some people may spend a lot of time behind corporate walls where they are not allowed to share. So I don't know how to address this, I'd just trust people more if I can read their code.
There may be people who can learn just by reading but I haven't met them. Or rather, in my experience the only people who claimed to know something because they read a book on that topic have turned out not to know that thing at all. It's hard to distinguish between those who deluded themselves into thinking they understand and those who just lie about having read or understood.
So, if one has nothing else, one could show solved exercises.
-
Using it as a sample repo is not a bad idea, I've just rarely seen that happen.
It might be different where you are, but I've gotten CVs complete with a page on hobbies and links to social media accounts and pet/ open source/ hobby projects - unsolicited. I might be too old school or something, as I really discourage people to send me unsorted, semi-relevant chaos.
I include mine (in a round-about way - I point to my website and that has the jump point to SourceForge). But then my open source is directly related to my dog agility addiction. (And yes, it has helped get me a job) In my resume, I just list it like I list past jobs - a quick summary.
-
-
@dcon said:
SourceForge
Why would you want that on your resume?
Well, I did first publish the code in 2003, so github wasn't an option...
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
[T]he slacker may be doing just the amount of studying they need to do. They've allocated time each day[dubious - discuss] to do a bit so they aren't cramming at the last minute. They are eating, exercising and sleeping right[citation needed], helping with long term recall.... They have friends[citation needed] to discuss concepts with.
These may be true, but they by no means follow from being a slacker.
-
baring crazy examples of exerting yourself to the point of exhaustion, is just bullshit.
Exerting yourself to the point of exhaustion while bare is just an example of crazy
bullshitfun?
-
-
enum class Boomzilla { _TRUE, _FALSE, ALSO_YES };
-
These may be true, but they by no means follow from being a slacker.
And my point was the slacker/keener binary wasn't as "common sense" as originally presented, and @blakeyrat 's "provide some data" was perfectly cromulant.
Letter and spirit of the law - Wikipedia
