21–30 of 69 posts
Now is as good a time as ever to be a seasoned Full Stack engineer. Pursuing an MS and shifting specialties seems very expensive.
Despite all the support other commenters are giving, I believe you should be very hesitant about making such a career shift.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Java, Scala, Ruby, Python, Angular.
Interesting. Some time ago I had the ongoing debate with a colleague on what it meant to be full stack. I was under the impression that full stack meant you can do what's needed to stand up a solution at literally every OSI layer. For example, from down at the base of infrastructure, networking, hardware/cloud, servers / platforms, integration, data / database, custom and COTs applications and services to clients, UI…
Yeah, that's what makes this term a poor one IMO. It's not at all clear what it means. I've always taken it to mean "not merely Javascript."
I don't believe Full Stack is a real thing. I also believe you have probably been doing distributed systems even if you think you haven't.
Don't you need to know some of Distributed Systems to consider yourself Full Stack engineer?
I vote yes for distributed systems, no for the Masters' Degree. If you already know how to code, it's easy to get into other fields and train yourself, thereby not losing money. You can also write open source code if you don't think you could find the appropriate job instantly.
Yes, the MSc taught me a lot about Distributed Systems. Yes, it cost me all of the cash I had saved up (£15,000, no debt). Yes, I could have tried to go it alone... but had I done that there is a good chance I might not have learned enough to know that I do not know enough; how to explore the challenges of designing and working with Distributed Systems; how to understand and debate the tradeoffs of different systems; how to apply the theory to the pratice; how to read, analyze and even critize white papers; I could go on...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting. Some time ago I had the ongoing debate with a colleague on what it meant to be full stack. I was under the impression that full stack meant you can do what's needed to stand up a solution at literally every OSI layer. For example, from down at the base of infrastructure, networking, hardware/cloud, servers / platforms, integration, data / database, custom and COTs applications and services to clients, UI…
> Interesting. Some time ago I had the ongoing debate with a colleague on what it meant to be full stack. Yeah, that's what makes this term a poor one IMO. It's not at all clear what it means. I've always taken it to mean "not merely Javascript."
Fullstack developer = someone who can do all parts of a project on their own if they wanted to.