Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surely there's nothing wrong with single-character variable names, used appropriately.
What's an example of an appropriate single-char variable name, in your opinion?
Top Things That Annoy Programmers
41–50 of 62 posts
Re: Top Things That Annoy Programmers
#4210. Requests that begin with, "All you have to do is...". 9. Deadlines fabricated by others. 8. Single character variable names. 7. Being spoonfed requirements on a need-to-know basis. 6. SQL Selects within iterations. 5. Requests that describe how, but not what. 4. Variable names that don't describe what they are. 3. Meetings without beer. 2. Dropping everything for the emergency du jour. 1. Top 10 Lists that infer…
You get meetings with beer? What is this? Madison Ave where everybody has a bottle of scotch in their drawer?
Re: Top Things That Annoy Programmers
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is thinking like a user, not thinking like a programmer. As a programmer, you don't want to fix the contact form, you need to fix the need to fix the contact form. This is how you avoid deathmarch projects; you program away the tedious parts so that you have a functioning system instead of a bunch of code that does stuff. Just sayin'.
I'm thinking as an employee, and not as a dreamer living in a world where the boss asks you what sounds like fun.
Unless you really only have one page that never needs to change (and when has that ever happened?), programming is going to beat coding every time. And it's more fun!
Re: Top Things That Annoy Programmers
#44Re: Top Things That Annoy Programmers
#45Re: Top Things That Annoy Programmers
#46Re: Top Things That Annoy Programmers
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most people can't lead. They need someone telling them what to do and keeping them on-track. These are two separate skills - the ability to lead others, and the ability to work productively without being led. I'm not convinced either claim is true to be honest - it's probably more true to say that most people have never had the opportunity to even try to develop these skills.
"These are two separate skills - the ability to lead others, and the ability to work productively without being led." One skill leads to another. If you can show upper management that you have the ability to work without being led, you can eventually become a manager. "I'm not convinced either claim is true to be honest - it's probably more true to say that most people have never had the opportunity to even try to de…
Re: Top Things That Annoy Programmers
#48One thing that annoys me are arbitrary deadlines. I once had a "manager" tell me that to help me out in working faster, he's going to put a deadline on the project.
Of course that's why the project was late! It's because I had no deadline. It's not because it needed 10 programmers and I was the only one working on it. Needless to say, I didn't work there for long.
Re: Top Things That Annoy Programmers
#4910. Requests that begin with, "All you have to do is...". 9. Deadlines fabricated by others. 8. Single character variable names. 7. Being spoonfed requirements on a need-to-know basis. 6. SQL Selects within iterations. 5. Requests that describe how, but not what. 4. Variable names that don't describe what they are. 3. Meetings without beer. 2. Dropping everything for the emergency du jour. 1. Top 10 Lists that infer…
Re: Top Things That Annoy Programmers
#50Being thought of as a "subordinate" (I mention this, because he talks about programmers as being subordinates). Am I the only person on earth that rails against this? I trade my time for money, but I am no-one's "subordinate". To me, a manager is someone who makes sure I can get my work done and checks on the overall progress. I guess I'm asking for a mighty downvoting but I really want to know if others think its ok…
That's funny, because "subordinate" has replaced the previous generation's "inferior" as the commonly-used term for an employee down a step in the org chart. However, to answer your question: if someone can determine whether you get to keep your job, whether you like it or not you are that person's subordinate.
Trying to get my head around this. What does "keeping one's job" even mean? isn't there still a mutual contract, and both parties can break out of it? So the boss can act on behalf of the company, and you can't. But presumably you can still quit the job on your own decision. Does that make the boss your subordinate?
It seems the boss has more leverage, as the worst you can do to him is quit, whereas he can fire you. But both parties can hurt each other.
I hope I'll never have to enter such an environment again.