Are software engineering “best practices” just developer preferences?

Post by auxym » Fri, Oct 01, 2021, 2:00 PM UTC

agentultra wrote: post #340

belval wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit like saying that you are a doctor, nurse or a lawyer (attorney?). In Canada these are protected titles that can only be used if you are part of a professional order that has oversight over your activities and can audit your work at basically any time. There are some tasks that can only be performed if you are certified and pay the annual fees. Where this falls apart is that "Software Engineering" is a real…

Exactly what I was trying to get across. The protected term is meaningless even if enforced, it seems to me, because there are no "reserved tasks," as you say. It's bit like... being able to practice law as long as you don't call yourself a lawyer. You're a legal assistant instead. In a similar fashion developers are practising software engineering without calling themselves, "engineers." I don't think we all need to…

Post by the_only_law » Fri, Oct 01, 2021, 2:26 PM UTC

sidlls wrote: post #342

dtech wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a symptom of the lack of knowledge not a cause. Imagine you want to built a building but no one really knows how, then copying successfully completed buildings, and established construction engineers and companies is a pretty good idea. That's what's going on in SE.

It's both, as it's a feedback cycle. This industry, like many others, rewards narcissism and loudmouths above all else. It does so in the large (e.g. Fowler or Uncle Bob worship; "ex-FAANG" cache) and in the small (the self-promoting engineer who touts his work even if it's not all that great gets promoted over the "soft-power" engineer managing tough projects lowkey). In this environment the symptom feeds the cause,…

Post by soco » Fri, Oct 01, 2021, 3:10 PM UTC

Dudeman112 wrote: post #334

chmsky00 wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Best practices” smells like such a marketing term it should be tossed in the bin. It’s poetic language that has nothing to do with specific problems. What people usually mean when it comes to engineering is “be safe, reliable, and correct.” Security best practices to be safe. Developer best practices for reliability. Etc etc “Best practices” is hand wave-y fluff for “do a good job” and doesn’t need a technical defin…

I think it's very telling just how little engineering there is in Software Engineering that people can call best practices "just preferences" or "marketing fluff" and not be immediately laughed out of the room. Because that's what would happen if someone suggested "best practices smells like a marketing term" in an actual engineering discipline.

Post by Zababa » Fri, Oct 01, 2021, 4:49 PM UTC

oreally wrote: post #307

poulsbohemian wrote: post #264

The biggest issue I saw with "best practices" in my career is the failure to take into account who it claiming it to be a best practice, and in what context . I saw too many junior developers read a rando blog article, then get a non-technical / semi-technical manager excited about something that made their life easier, even though it was by no means a good practice for the context at hand. Or alternatively, believe…

To add on to this, the current most preached about "best practices" comes largely from a de-risking, never-ever fail point of view, ie. 'safety'. Unfortunately with such standards also comes a concept known as 'acccountability', ie. 'ass-covering' practices that provide little practical value. This results in programmers no longer being able to iterate fast and having to rely on some third-party whose tradeoffs they…

Post by baja_blast » Fri, Oct 01, 2021, 5:28 PM UTC

noidesto wrote: post #283

cptaj wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Managers excited about a new tech idea are probably the most destructive thing in the industry.

As are managers that conform to archaic tech when better options exist.