Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Myth of the Full Stack Developer

themartec.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 104 posts

Re: The Myth of the Full Stack Developer

#91

Post by rplst8 »

_lex wrote: post #24

>"most “full stack” developers have not truly mastered front end and back end" We need to do something about the default of developer bashing prevalent in our culture. There's no true Scotsman, nobody is 100% perfectly attuned to the latest developments on any surface. Instead engineers develop along competencies that are required in their work. If you need to deep dive into a backend problem, you'll get better at th…

If this is the case, then no one should lend any more credence to the term "full stack developer" than to the phrase "I like to work on all sorts of software" - because it's meaningless.

What I do know is that there are many dishonest types that will say they are "full stack" when they really aren't. Then there are others that will not lie on a resume and say they are, when they in fact aren't.

The reality is that any dev can learn to do both - but hiring managers want it all, now, for free, and with a smile.

All that said - the more disciplines and domains you use day to day, the worse off you are going to be IMO. Sure it's good be a polyglot, but specializing helps to hone and sharpen skills.

Re: The Myth of the Full Stack Developer

#92

Post by rplst8 »

rhinoceraptor wrote: post #81
purple-again wrote: post #7

This again. Is a doctor in his first year of being a full fledged doctor any less of a doctor than one with 20 years of experience? The more experienced doctor is almost assuredly better and preferable, but both of them are doctors. This assumption that you have to be a master of the front end and a master of the back end to be a full stack developer is flawed from the start. Have you created economic value with a co…

An experienced physician also (likely) has outdated knowledge. For example they might instruct you to eat a low fat diet, even though that is pretty thoroughly discredited nowadays.

First, it depends on the age of the physician. At some point in the late 90s or early 00s most (if not all) of the medical boards require that doctors continue to take continuing education credits to keep up on changes in medicine. In addition they have to re-certify every 10 years. That was not the case in the past, and older doctors are grandfathered. But if you doctor is younger than 40, they will likely need to re-certify and keep up to date.

Second, the prevailing wisdom on low fat diets are still up in the air. AFAIK, the American Academy of Physicians and the American Heart Association have not changed their positions on low fat diets.

Re: The Myth of the Full Stack Developer

#93

Post by scaryclam »

JamesBarney wrote: post #75
aphextron wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think your analogy holds up. Theres really no such thing as just a "doctor". Everyone specializes in some field, even if that specialization is in generalization. But doctors who specialize in general cases (i.e. family practice) serve the role of passing you off to the appropriate specialist to fulfill your needs. And in the same way I would expect a highly experienced programmer to know the limits of their…

I can attest that there is a such thing as a doctor. I saw one just a couple of weeks ago. I'm pretty sure she specializes in family practice, but she is a doctor none the less. And she'd probably be be very confused if I told her she didn't exist, or she wasn't a doctor because doctors don't exist.

But she wouldn't be confused if you said she wasn't a heart surgeon, because she's not. She can tell you a bunch of stuff about the heart, she can probably do surgery if she was in a position where she had to, but she's not a heart surgeon and wouldn't claim to be.

Re: The Myth of the Full Stack Developer

#94

Post by zepolen »

jachee wrote: post #57
zepolen wrote: post #38

I'm a full stack developer. Myth busted. Nay sayers ask me any question you like.

Which stack(s)?

Debian, Nginx, Apache, Postgresql, Mongo, InfluxDB, Grafana, Elasticsearch, PHP, Python, Node, Plain JS, jQuery, React, Polymer, CSS3

I've got heavy experience in all of those.

Plus a bunch of other techs that I've used but wouldn't consider myself strong.

Re: The Myth of the Full Stack Developer

#95

Post by timdavila »

As far as I understand it, the argument against self-proclaimed "full stack" developers basically boils down to - there's too much to know.

I refute this. I like to put my job in perspective. Astronauts must be skilled pilots, engineers, and have at least some medical training. Doctors have to be able to diagnose hundreds of different ailments. Lawyers memorize books of laws.

There's no maximum storage capacity for your brain. And constantly learning has been shown to keep people feeling better about their life. So I strive to learn something new everyday, and never limit myself to being a developer who only works on X system or in Y area.

Re: The Myth of the Full Stack Developer

#97

Post by rhinoceraptor »

rplst8 wrote: post #92
rhinoceraptor wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An experienced physician also (likely) has outdated knowledge. For example they might instruct you to eat a low fat diet, even though that is pretty thoroughly discredited nowadays.

First, it depends on the age of the physician. At some point in the late 90s or early 00s most (if not all) of the medical boards require that doctors continue to take continuing education credits to keep up on changes in medicine. In addition they have to re-certify every 10 years. That was not the case in the past, and older doctors are grandfathered. But if you doctor is younger than 40, they will likely need to r…

Promoting the low fat diet (or just demonizing saturated fat) is incredibly misguided, there simply isn't (and never was) any evidence for it. It's not surprising the AHA et. all hasn't changed course, they made a terrible error and admitting that is embarrassing and stains their legacy (but their legacy is already stained by any right-thinking person).

I believe the low fat diet will be seen as almost equal to the promotion of radium water for health is seen now. At least radium water only affected small quantities of people. The human suffering caused by the low fat diet is unquantifiable. It's a relic of the Cold War that is unfortunately still alive and kicking.

Re: The Myth of the Full Stack Developer

#98

Post by [deleted] »

rplst8 wrote: post #92
rhinoceraptor wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An experienced physician also (likely) has outdated knowledge. For example they might instruct you to eat a low fat diet, even though that is pretty thoroughly discredited nowadays.

First, it depends on the age of the physician. At some point in the late 90s or early 00s most (if not all) of the medical boards require that doctors continue to take continuing education credits to keep up on changes in medicine. In addition they have to re-certify every 10 years. That was not the case in the past, and older doctors are grandfathered. But if you doctor is younger than 40, they will likely need to r…

[deleted]

Re: The Myth of the Full Stack Developer

#99

Post by kthejoker2 »

lr4444lr wrote: post #48
quakenul wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how doesn't it hold up? In no way did OP suggest that you need to be able to do everything on any conceivable project by yourself. There could be plenty things that are outside the scope of any given Full Stack Developer. How would that invalidate all the times when they were not?

Maybe he meant, for example, that a 1st year cardiologist is probably going to be a better cardiologist than a 20 year nephrologist. The OP seems to be insinuating in his medical analogy that only time - not specialty - is the most important metric. Take that 20 year nephrologist: if he had spent 10 of those years in cardiology, I don't think most other nephrologists would say that makes him a better doctor just beca…

Lesser doctor or lesser nephrologist? Semantics are very important in these sorts of discussions.
Post reply on HN