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

Debugging an evil Go runtime bug: From heat guns to kernel compiler flags (2017)

marcan.st

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 50 posts

Re: Debugging an evil Go runtime bug: From heat guns to kernel compiler flags (2017)

#21

Post by gouggoug »

randomdata wrote: post #16
gouggoug wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> means that a 1x developer will take around 10 hours to get to the same place A "workaround" isn't an adequate substitute for actual the understanding and fixing of the root cause of a bug. What you think is a 10x developer is, in fact, a short-term 10x developer, medium-term 1x developer, long-term -10x developer. Their work while seemingly great at first is just accrued debt with an incredibly high interest rate.…

> A "workaround" isn't an adequate substitute for actual the understanding and fixing of the root cause of a bug. Right, hence why we recognize that a 10x developer is a weaker developer. Was there something that implied that a weak developer is a substitute for a talented developer for you to say this, or are you just pulling words out of thin air?

Merely arguing about your _definition_ of 10x engineer and 1x engineer.

Your original comment at the top of the thread implies the engineer who wrote the blog post is a 1x engineer because they spent so much time finding and fixing this bug.

Re: Debugging an evil Go runtime bug: From heat guns to kernel compiler flags (2017)

#22

Post by randomdata »

gouggoug wrote: post #21
randomdata wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A "workaround" isn't an adequate substitute for actual the understanding and fixing of the root cause of a bug. Right, hence why we recognize that a 10x developer is a weaker developer. Was there something that implied that a weak developer is a substitute for a talented developer for you to say this, or are you just pulling words out of thin air?

Merely arguing about your _definition_ of 10x engineer and 1x engineer. Your original comment at the top of the thread implies the engineer who wrote the blog post is a 1x engineer because they spent so much time finding and fixing this bug.

Yes, and as the comment before it asserts, most engineers would never take that kind of time. They'd bang out some workaround as quickly as possible and move on with life.

But my original comment at the top also praised the value of the 1x engineer; noting that the rest of us could learn a thing or two from them. There is no denying that 1x developers are the better developers.

The question remains outstanding: Where did you pick up the suggestion that the quick fix is a suitable replacement for the talented engineers who can fully understand a problem that prompted the rebuttal?

Re: Debugging an evil Go runtime bug: From heat guns to kernel compiler flags (2017)

#25

Post by Dylan16807 »

eikenberry wrote: post #14
randomdata wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the same token, you might be the first person I have ever seen give respect to the 1x developer. I respect that. We could no doubt all learn a thing or two from the 1x developer that doesn't rush through everything with quick solutions.

Is the 10x thing really only about speed? I would say this guy is a perfect 10x example as he actually gets to the root cause of a difficult problem. When I think of 1x (or less) devs they are usually the type that don't get things done because they can't (without a lot of help), not because they are slow. I.E. overall technical chops, not just speed.

> Is the 10x thing really only about speed?

As long as they're moderately competent, yes. They need to know how to debug normal things, but they don't need to handle every esoteric niche. The thing that matters is ability to put out tons of productive code.

Often that means a speciality where they're an expert, but it doesn't have to mean that.

> When I think of 1x (or less) devs they are usually the type that don't get things done because they can't (without a lot of help), not because they are slow. I.E. overall technical chops, not just speed.

It sounds like you're taking "1x" as a dismissal. Isn't it supposed to be a pretty ordinary dev?

Re: Debugging an evil Go runtime bug: From heat guns to kernel compiler flags (2017)

#26

Post by gouggoug »

randomdata wrote: post #22
gouggoug wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Merely arguing about your _definition_ of 10x engineer and 1x engineer. Your original comment at the top of the thread implies the engineer who wrote the blog post is a 1x engineer because they spent so much time finding and fixing this bug.

Yes, and as the comment before it asserts, most engineers would never take that kind of time. They'd bang out some workaround as quickly as possible and move on with life. But my original comment at the top also praised the value of the 1x engineer; noting that the rest of us could learn a thing or two from them. There is no denying that 1x developers are the better developers. The question remains outstanding: Where…

Guess I misinterpreted your comment ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, relax.

Re: Debugging an evil Go runtime bug: From heat guns to kernel compiler flags (2017)

#27

Post by kragen »

randomdata wrote: post #16
gouggoug wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> means that a 1x developer will take around 10 hours to get to the same place A "workaround" isn't an adequate substitute for actual the understanding and fixing of the root cause of a bug. What you think is a 10x developer is, in fact, a short-term 10x developer, medium-term 1x developer, long-term -10x developer. Their work while seemingly great at first is just accrued debt with an incredibly high interest rate.…

> A "workaround" isn't an adequate substitute for actual the understanding and fixing of the root cause of a bug. Right, hence why we recognize that a 10x developer is a weaker developer. Was there something that implied that a weak developer is a substitute for a talented developer for you to say this, or are you just pulling words out of thin air?

'a weaker developer' is the opposite of the standard definition of 'a 10x developer'. if you are going to use phrases to mean the opposite of their conventional meaning you should warn people so they can avoid arguing with you on the assumption that you're using them to mean what everyone else uses them to mean

Re: Debugging an evil Go runtime bug: From heat guns to kernel compiler flags (2017)

#28

Post by eikenberry »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #25
eikenberry wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the 10x thing really only about speed? I would say this guy is a perfect 10x example as he actually gets to the root cause of a difficult problem. When I think of 1x (or less) devs they are usually the type that don't get things done because they can't (without a lot of help), not because they are slow. I.E. overall technical chops, not just speed.

> Is the 10x thing really only about speed? As long as they're moderately competent, yes. They need to know how to debug normal things, but they don't need to handle every esoteric niche. The thing that matters is ability to put out tons of productive code. Often that means a speciality where they're an expert, but it doesn't have to mean that. > When I think of 1x (or less) devs they are usually the type that don't…

Yeah... didn't mean the 1x as dismissively as it came off. Got to carried away with my point. My mistake.

But to my original point, I just don't buy the 10X story as being only how fast you write code. I've known developers who designed and wrote such that much time was saved working with that code in the future. These people are, IMO, much more deserving of the 10x moniker as maintaining code is much more important that just cranking it out... with the only possible exception being early stage startup (but not really as they will be crippled in the next stage).

Re: Debugging an evil Go runtime bug: From heat guns to kernel compiler flags (2017)

#29

Post by randomdata »

kragen wrote: post #27
randomdata wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A "workaround" isn't an adequate substitute for actual the understanding and fixing of the root cause of a bug. Right, hence why we recognize that a 10x developer is a weaker developer. Was there something that implied that a weak developer is a substitute for a talented developer for you to say this, or are you just pulling words out of thin air?

'a weaker developer' is the opposite of the standard definition of 'a 10x developer'. if you are going to use phrases to mean the opposite of their conventional meaning you should warn people so they can avoid arguing with you on the assumption that you're using them to mean what everyone else uses them to mean

Why should I do that? An "argument" about nothing is hilarious.

Re: Debugging an evil Go runtime bug: From heat guns to kernel compiler flags (2017)

#30

Post by dwattttt »

Thaxll wrote: post #12

One thing I learned from that post back then is that you can instruct Grub to ignore some part of your physical memory. Really nice trick, not sure this is doable on Windows / Mac?

I was just looking at the bcdedit options earlier today, this is doable on Windows
Post reply on HN