21–26 of 26 posts
With both decent testing and decent monitoring/logging/o11y at each layer, no one should ever have to debug the whole stack at once and can instead focus on the layer with the problem.
I wish we could put the old days of having a tightly-coupled stack of untested cruft behind us.
This screed reads like someone who doesn't do testing. Or who only does end-to-end tests. With both decent testing and decent monitoring/logging/o11y at each layer, no one should ever have to debug the whole stack at once and can instead focus on the layer with the problem. I wish we could put the old days of having a tightly-coupled stack of untested cruft behind us.
this response reads like someone who's never worked in any size organization
even with testing I've seen all sorts of organizations mess it up, the tests become a negative cause they're not even used properly and just optimizing for "coverage"
Yep. Ongoing problem for decades. And now with “AI” to make it more ridiculous. I look forward to retiring soon and never looking at code again.
Amen! The funny thing is this sounds like a “get off my lawn!” rant, and yet it’s so true if you’ve been around long enough to have seen a few tech cycles. But this also only seems to matter if you are NOT in a “move fast and break stuff” environment.
I agree. I also think the "move fast and break stuff" mindset is one of the worst things to happen in the industry.
But it makes me wonder how people have time to invent all this shit when they need to move fast. Learning a new stack every 2 years doesn't seem like moving as fast as you could.