3 ms·
'I'm really glad I don't have to work with people who think like this.' You're glad you don't work with people who weigh up the list of possible solutions base
by calsy 10y ago
'I'm really glad I don't have to work with people who think like this.'
You're glad you don't work with people who weigh up the list of possible solutions based on the specific problem? You're glad you don't work with people who care about performance, size and redundant code? You want to work with people who don't think, who don't question implementation?
Thats pretty dumb isn't it. If someone has an alternative solution and a sound argument to back them up, your response would be 'I don't like the way you think'.
But I guess projects are only worth talking about when they are incredibly complex. A simple website taking 10,000+ hits a day isn't worth squat unless you have a big JS framework under the hood. Complexity = value, not users, not the UX, not the support, not performance, but COMPLEXITY.
- maaaats 10y agoYou are building a straw man and then arguing with it.
- calsy 10y agoNo, im not. Those are the exact points laid out in the article. The author mentions both the performance, size and redundancy related to frameworks. Gjolund, states that he is glad he does not work with people who think like this. He goes onto mention that projects that have limited complexity are not worth talking about, thus the only factor in considering a projects worth is its complexity.
- gjolund 10y agoYou are right, 10,000 hits a day is not worth talking about.
- calsy 10y agoReally thats it?