4 ms·
They might have shipped sooner had they let everyone work normal hours. It's not just that the studies agree sustained crunch is a bad idea, I've seen several t
by Joeri 10y ago
They might have shipped sooner had they let everyone work normal hours. It's not just that the studies agree sustained crunch is a bad idea, I've seen several times in person that sustained crunch beyond the first few weeks lowers overall productivity. People start goofing off, or just staring at code without making much progress, or writing huge mountains of code when a little stream of code would have sufficed with more forethought. And the code that they do write they have to revisit later to fix all the bugs caused by sloppy coding.
- Retric 10y agoI have personally seen someone in crunch replace a few terse lines written in 15 minutes that worked. With pages of boilerplate code and a few dozen files that must have taken days. His response, I did not understand what you did. Ask? I mean no wonder that team was working 80 hour weeks. If you stop thinking then even very simple problems become monumental challenges.
- aedron 10y agoWhenever I work more than 10-11 hours, I usually come back to the code the next day and wonder WTF I was thinking. Problems with straightforward solutions solved with large amounts of garbage code, wonky designs, lots of stuff that just gets thrown out wholesale. It is literally counterproductive.
- thenomad 10y agoI believe there have been studies confirming this phenomenon. The phrase they used was "undertime" - what happens after "overtime".