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

Confessions of a Software Developer: No More Self-Censorship

kerrick.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 372 posts

Re: Confessions of a Software Developer: No More Self-Censorship

#341

Post by keeda »

ipsento606 wrote: post #298

I would say something like 95% of the code I have been paid to write as a software engineer has 0% test coverage. Like, literally, not a single test on the entire project. Across many different companies and several countries, frontend and backend. I wonder if I'm an anomaly, or if it's actually more common that one might assume?

It's just a matter of economics. Where the costs of bugs in production is low, which is probably the vast majority of the software out there, extensive test coverage simply doesn't make economic sense. Something breaks in some niche app, maybe someone is bothered enough to complain about it, it gets fixed at some point, and everybody moves on.

Where the costs are high, like say in safety critical software or large companies with highly paid engineers on-call where 9s of uptime matters, the amount of testing and development rigor naturally scale up.

This is why rigid stances like that from "Uncle Bob" are shortsighted: they have no awareness of the actual economics of things.

Re: Confessions of a Software Developer: No More Self-Censorship

#342

Post by almost »

ReptileMan wrote: post #324
almost wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds very "the perfect is the enemy of good". Tests don't need to be perfect, they don't need to be written by different people (!!!), they don't need to cover 100% of the code. As long as they're not flakey (tests which fail randomly really can he worse than nothing) it really helps in development and maintenence to have some tests. It's really nice when the (frequent) mistakes I make show up on my machine or…

>they don't need to be written by different people If you make logical error in the code, chances are you will make logical error in the test that tests that segment too. A big problem with tests is making sure they are correct.

From my experience though I often do make logical errors in my code but not in my tests and I do frequently catch errors because of this. I think thats a fairly normal experience with writing automated tests.

Would having someone else write the tests catch more logical errors? Very possibly, I haven't tried it but that sounds reasonable. It also does seem like that (and the other things it implies) would be a pretty extreme change in the speed of development. I can see it being worth it in some situations but honestly I don't see it as something practical for many types of projects.

What I don't understand is saying "well we can't do the really extremely hard version so let's not do the fairly easy version" which is how I took you original comment.

Re: Confessions of a Software Developer: No More Self-Censorship

#343

Post by hnlmorg »

Spooky23 wrote: post #241
hnlmorg wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is you cannot have any fact based discussions because statistics are generalised whereas people’s ability to thrive in office or remote work depends deeply on both the company culture and the individual. Thus it is always going to be an emotional argument rather than a fact-based discussion. It’s like asking someone what their favourite food is. They might be able to explain why they like the dish, but that…

It’s a little more than that, because people generally won’t go to war over pizza vs tacos.

They probably might if they spent 40+ hours a week eating it and their bills, home, and family’s wellbeing, all depended on how well they eat pizza vs tacos.

But comparisons aside, some people will just argue over anything. Such as the meta debate we’re having right now over the stuff people will argue about. ;)

Re: Confessions of a Software Developer: No More Self-Censorship

#344

Post by nazgul17 »

array_key_first wrote: post #339
TRiG_Ireland wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a very strange (and very emotional) take. I find it easier to focus with some other people around me, so long as they're being quiet. An office (or a library) is easier to work in than my house. I also really like the idea of separation between my home and my workplace. If I was rich and had room in my house for a separate office I could close the door on when the workday was over, perhaps I'd feel differentl…

The main problem with the office work versus WFH debate debacle is that the positions are not on equal footing and, actually, are not equally valid. Working in an office as a preference is one that naturally relies on the control of other people. The reason people like working in an office isn't because of the office. If you went to the office, by yourself, it would be worthless. The value of the office is the commun…

I feel like you're putting words in someone else's mouth. Maybe you are not responding to OP but, in your mind, to an ex-colleague that did so in a different venue than this forum?

In a forum like this, stating your preference is just that: stating your preference.

If you were talking with your manager and stated your preference, you'd be stating your preference and, between the lines, asking to make it happen for yourself.

If you were talking with your manager and stated your preference and specified the reason is because you prefer working around people, only then, between the lines, you'd be asking to make it happen for your whole team.

Re: Confessions of a Software Developer: No More Self-Censorship

#345

Post by iteria »

tpmoney wrote: post #297
zb3 wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lots of emo, not much fact. People not wanting others to indirectly force them to relocate, work additional unpaid commute hours and pay for it is not "emo". It's a critical fight.

And people not wanting others to indirectly force them to subsidize their employers by devoting unpaid portions of their limited living space, utility bills and personal equipment to their work is also a "critical fight". Remote work inherently blurs the line between "company property" and "personal property" in ways that can impose heavy burdens on employees. Confidentiality and privacy requirements might require em…

That sounds like a "them" problem. The cost of gas and the time I don't have because of commuting is material. I used to lose 2-3 hours of every. Single. Day. To commuting. All because the places where I can find jobs were either too expensive for me to afford to live in or, get this, I didn't want to uproot my family every single time I got a new job.

The cost of my utilities? Listen, I don't know know much electricity costs where you are, but the cost or running an extra computer is pennies a day. The cost of internet is set for me. We might talk about the increased cost of heating and cooling, but I was never one of those people who turned their system off when gone because that doesn't make literally any sense with my utility's time based pricing. It's literally cheaper to let it run as it is than than do that.

As for space and confidential items. I'm not sure ahat to say. I don't have thieves coming in and out of my house and I have a password good enough to defend the casual nosy child or relative. I have an office now because I have a house, but I have worked remotely in smaller spaces and it was never any problem. At least not compared to commuting 1 hour being, although I have commuted up to 2 hours on bad traffic days which were not particularly rare occurrences. And this is just have it is in all the cities I have lived. Perhaps not all cities, but the two metropolitan areas I have lived within and in the suburbs of. Living within the city didn't even guarantee me a reasonable commute.

If the trade off is a company getting a corner or a room I wasn't using anyway plus a few dollars of electricity subsidy and I get several hundred dollars in my time measure by my pay rate not commuting plus a couple dollar in not spending it on gas, I am happy to trade that. I'm also capable of putting my computer away and safely like literally anything else I own.

I also don't worry about the isolation that people mention (although not you here) because I have a vibrant social life. As someone who was never the typical demographic of the field, I have neve depending on socializing with my coworkers in office for social fulfillment. I still somehow maintain the correct level of social comraderie via digital means. Remote work doesn't mean not interacting with your coworkers at all.

Re: Confessions of a Software Developer: No More Self-Censorship

#346

Post by tpmoney »

iteria wrote: post #345
tpmoney wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And people not wanting others to indirectly force them to subsidize their employers by devoting unpaid portions of their limited living space, utility bills and personal equipment to their work is also a "critical fight". Remote work inherently blurs the line between "company property" and "personal property" in ways that can impose heavy burdens on employees. Confidentiality and privacy requirements might require em…

That sounds like a "them" problem. The cost of gas and the time I don't have because of commuting is material. I used to lose 2-3 hours of every. Single. Day. To commuting. All because the places where I can find jobs were either too expensive for me to afford to live in or, get this, I didn't want to uproot my family every single time I got a new job. The cost of my utilities? Listen, I don't know know much electric…

Why are the problems of people who don't own large houses with spare rooms they can afford to dedicate to their company for free, or living arrangements otherwise conducive to working remotely a "them" problem, but your failure to live within walking distance of your jobs not a "you" problem? Perhaps the truth here is that your experience isn't a universal experience, and just because remote working works out exceptionally well for you doesn't mean that applies universally. Maybe people who want to work in offices legitimately find that to be a better way to work.

Re: Confessions of a Software Developer: No More Self-Censorship

#347

Post by ryanackley »

mekoka wrote: post #282
ryanackley wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels like you're blaming the author for the lazy thinking of someone who might read his opinion and take it as objective fact. The 7 times 9 analogy doesn't track it all. 7x9 = 63 is an objective fact by definition . His thoughts on remote work are an opinion by definition . If other people decide that what he says is dogmatic, blame it on their own lack of critical thinking skills. The meta-point of the article…

Giving a blank check to anything someone says because they disclaimed that they'll be uttering opinions? That sounds kinda naive. Have you never heard someone include facts to support their opinions? Would you disagree that it's fair game to attack opinions presented as facts? The "problematic" paragraph jumps out because the assertive generalizations moot the earlier agreement that the author is sharing their experi…

What are we arguing about? Is it the way he expressed his opinion?

Would you agree that whether something is an opinion or fact is itself objective, for most cases at least?

I ask because nobody is questioning whether or not what he states was actually an opinion. They seem to simply be upset with the manner in which he phrased it. He was simply too sure of himself and people found that offensive. Which seems a little ridiculous don't you think?

Re: Confessions of a Software Developer: No More Self-Censorship

#348

Post by array_key_first »

nazgul17 wrote: post #344
array_key_first wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main problem with the office work versus WFH debate debacle is that the positions are not on equal footing and, actually, are not equally valid. Working in an office as a preference is one that naturally relies on the control of other people. The reason people like working in an office isn't because of the office. If you went to the office, by yourself, it would be worthless. The value of the office is the commun…

I feel like you're putting words in someone else's mouth. Maybe you are not responding to OP but, in your mind, to an ex-colleague that did so in a different venue than this forum? In a forum like this, stating your preference is just that: stating your preference. If you were talking with your manager and stated your preference, you'd be stating your preference and, between the lines, asking to make it happen for yo…

I agree, the preferences don't do anything unless used as a collective. But from the point of view of comparing the viewpoints, they're not apples to apples, because one requires the cooperation of other people. WFH isn't actually 'from home', it's from not-office-with-everyone-else. So if you just want to work in an office, then WFH is perfect for you. Arguably even better than working in the one and only office, because you get to choose the office.

But the buried lede so to speak is that RTO has literally nothing to do with the office. The office is just an empty box that happens to exist somewhere.

So the level of control for each preference is wildly different, and they can't just be compared like that. One is naturally 'closed', and the other naturally 'open'. That, to me, does speak to the intrinsic value of each preference.

Re: Confessions of a Software Developer: No More Self-Censorship

#349

Post by sbarre »

saghm wrote: post #318
sbarre wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> pretty much entirely just generalizations of their own experience, but phrased as if they're objective truth I mean you're describing 90% of blog and forum posts on the Internet here. This (IMO - so it's not ironic) is the biggest leap most people need to make to become more self-aware and to better parse the world around them: recognizing there is rarely an objective truth in most matters, and the idea that "my tr…

I think my issue is that the blog post comes across to me as in essence an argument that the person communicating shouldn't be dissuaded by potential reactions to what they say, but it fails to account for the difference between good-faith and bad-faith reactions. There's a huge difference between a bad-faith misinterpretation and a good-faith misunderstanding in my opinion, as the latter seems to come just as often…

Totally fair, I agree with your take on the blog post for sure.

Re: Confessions of a Software Developer: No More Self-Censorship

#350

Post by fud101 »

I got distracted and viewed the author's other posts, especially the .NET and Blazor posts. Imagine my surprise when I got through both, didn't see an update since March when he wrote them and then finally finished the confession post. That explains it. I was really interested in how he'd find the Lock book and Blazor itself.
Post reply on HN