Live data from Hacker News

Code with Engineering Playbook

microsoft.github.io

21–23 of 23 posts

Re: Code with Engineering Playbook

#21
post #2

As much as one could "nitpick" about ommisions or unnecessary points, for large companies these things are obvious yet necessary. I also liked the writing style guides that Microsoft and Google put out in recent years: - https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/teamblog/style-guide - https://developers.google.com/style/highlights

Glad you shared these valuable resources. As a self-taught coder, I always admired the quality in writings published by these big orgs but I couldn't emulate them. On the links you get access to various clear guidelines which are quite helpful for open-source technical docs and project description. Thank you Ser.

Re: Code with Engineering Playbook

#22
I feel a bit “we value processes over people” on this one. Not disagreeing with a lot that’s said but it just feels a bit prescriptive and I think agile (as in manifesto rather than big consultancy) is very much context specific

Re: Code with Engineering Playbook

#23
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I disagree strongly with “90%+ unit test coverage” though. Diminishing returns are very real there. Hi, stupid junior here. Can you elaborate a bit or give me some reading material? I'm currently struggling to get good practices with tests and understanding associated metrics. Thank you!

“stupid senior” here! don’t listen to them :) always go for 90+% . lower coverage is laziness and may hurt sooner than expected. Sure full coverage doesn’t preve tu r you to write a bad test.

I find any of these numbers pointless.

I’ve seen enough 100% or close to completely broken applications.

Post reply on HN