Red flags. Red flags everywhere.



  • @ObiWayneKenobi said:

    @Sir Twist said:
    It sounds like you only ever run into VB6 guys who have learned only enough .NET to make their crufty old shit build again.
    It sure feels that way sometimes. A lot of the .NET shops around here just don't seem to have a clue; either they've built a lot of legacy systems back in the 1.1 and 2.0 days and have no desire to ever refactor or address them, but keep adding to them nonstop and forcing the same old standards, or they're just seemingly staffed with old VB6ers that are lazy. I don't rightly know. What I do know is constantly dealing with "senior" developers, tech leads, and managers/directors/CIOs that had zero clue about any new trends in .NET started to get to me - I mean I didn't expect them to be jumping on the bandwagon, but I DO expect good developers to at least do what I do and keep a little up to date on trends and tools and best practices.The last straw for me was being fired because I was the only person on the team wanting us to refactor our code, make it not unmaintainable garbage, and actually try to make it scalable so it didn't crash every day.

    Ok ok ok ok ok we fucking get it. You had some bad experiences with .net devs. You got fired once. We get it. Shut up already. Get the fuck over it. Christ.

    For the record, I might be a terrible developer who's never heard of inversion of control containers, but I've never been fired. So there.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    For the record, I might be a terrible developer who's never heard of inversion of control containers, but I've never been fired. So there.

    You are terrible. I've heard of inversion of control.

    Of course, when I asked for clarification as to what that meant, the person advocating it took 20 minutes to stammer, mumble and explain something about configuration files before I nodded and backed away slowly.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Sutherlands said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    @Sutherlands said:
    @blakeyrat said:
    What's the point of an interface if you have a 1:1 relationship between interfaces and classes?
    Well, just off the top of my head, testing.

    How?

    @Sutherlands said:
    Now, when we are testing it, we can pass in a Mock Logger, that ignores what is logged, or verifies it... but now our tests aren't dependant on a network connection, or (really) any other class. If there's a bug in that class, it won't affect this class working.
     

     In other words, it allows you to test your class independently of anything else in the system, by setting up do-nothing mockups (or even ones that partially or even fully implement whatever they're mocking).  It's actually a pretty neat idea, but if you're working with legacy stuff--like my current job, we have one monolithic app that's probably 15+ years old, and regularly updated, but you could never really add all this cool stuff into it without a huge rewrite, and nobody's ever going to spend 6 months rewriting hundreds of thousands of LOC because that's not revenue-generating.

     


Log in to reply