3 ms·

That's the thing, I was writing what you call infrastructure software, powering large telecoms of Europe, going super deep with transaction processing, ensuring

by bitL 10y ago

That's the thing, I was writing what you call infrastructure software, powering large telecoms of Europe, going super deep with transaction processing, ensuring ACID down to cluster failure level, high availability, and often there were some "tabu" areas nobody was allowed to touch because they simply worked somehow, nobody understood consequences of changing them in production and they were just too critical to do something about them. And they were written in an absolutely horrible way with no documentation nor comments, probably spewed out during a week-long night shift of some once-in-a-generation genius in Santa Clara. According to you, (s)he should have been fired because the code wasn't maintainable (nobody was able to understand it down to all details as it would require top-end education in distributed algorithms, formal verification beyond mere PhD), yet was powering half of the world and made the company insanely rich.

tdb7893 10y ago
If you can find no one else who could do it then of course they shouldn't be fired. If you can find another programmer who can do it as well and have it also be maintainable then fire the original guy immediately. Lack of maintainability incurs a risk and a cost on businesses so unless they are adding enough value to make it worth it (as the person in your example is) then they probably should be fired
notacoward 10y ago
> they were written in an absolutely horrible way with no documentation nor comments Clearly not talking about a good programmer here, are we? Maybe one with some specialized knowledge, but deficient in other areas. > According to you, (s)he should have been fired because the code wasn't maintainable Damn right. It's possible to write maintainable code in any domain. The burden of doing things besides code - documentation, tests, proofs, whatever - gets higher, but that's part of the job. > it would require top-end education in distributed algorithms, formal verification beyond mere PhD This is exactly the kind of stuff I do every day. Have been for many years. And I hand it off to others who are able to maintain it. So I don't think your story proves what you want it to. Working in a difficult problem domain is a challenge to do better, not an excuse for doing worse. "Your friend" wasn't demonstrating greatness. "S/he" was demonstrating great carelessness and lack of discipline - hardly qualities I'd expect in someone who claimed to be passionate about their profession, and certainly not qualities I'd reward with continued employment.
- bitL 10y ago
  Sorry, this sounds like a nitpicking. It's akin to saying that Peter Sagan is a loser, because unlike Chris Froome he will never win Tour de France GC. Not to mention Mark Cavendish or Marcel Kittel, who are complete losers. People have various talents and their mental capacity is used best accordingly; if you start forcing them to do work that "hurts them", their best parts disappear, you won't get any results and their lives will be miserable. All because you decided how it must be while ignoring nature. Just out of curiosity, are you a German? I see similar thinking around here a lot.
  - notacoward 10y ago
    > if you start forcing them to do work that "hurts them", their best parts disappear, No offense, but this is starting to sound a bit Nietzschean. The ubermensch is how he is. He need not change, bears no responsibility for improving himself or finding another job more suited to strengths and weaknesses, others must accommodate. Bollocks. Skill must be matched with discipline, or else it's worthless. I'm sure your TdF idols would agree. If they couldn't apply discipline to do the job in front of them and to keep getting better at it, they wouldn't be in the Tour de France. > Just out of curiosity, are you a German? I see similar thinking around here a lot. No, but thanks for the stereotype. I know some Germans, I've been to Germany pretty recently, I think I'd fit in pretty well there, but I'm not German. (Actually there might be a percent or two of German blood in there, but there's far more Irish.) It's also pretty ironic that you'd say I seem that way, since you're the one echoing a German philosopher.

by bitL 10y ago

tdb7893 10y ago

If you can find no one else who could do it then of course they shouldn't be fired. If you can find another programmer who can do it as well and have it also be maintainable then fire the original guy immediately. Lack of maintainability incurs a risk and a cost on businesses so unless they are adding enough value to make it worth it (as the person in your example is) then they probably should be fired

notacoward 10y ago

> they were written in an absolutely horrible way with no documentation nor comments Clearly not talking about a good programmer here, are we? Maybe one with some specialized knowledge, but deficient in other areas. > According to you, (s)he should have been fired because the code wasn't maintainable Damn right. It's possible to write maintainable code in any domain. The burden of doing things besides code - documentation, tests, proofs, whatever - gets higher, but that's part of the job. > it would require top-end education in distributed algorithms, formal verification beyond mere PhD This is exactly the kind of stuff I do every day. Have been for many years. And I hand it off to others who are able to maintain it. So I don't think your story proves what you want it to. Working in a difficult problem domain is a challenge to do better, not an excuse for doing worse. "Your friend" wasn't demonstrating greatness. "S/he" was demonstrating great carelessness and lack of discipline - hardly qualities I'd expect in someone who claimed to be passionate about their profession, and certainly not qualities I'd reward with continued employment.

bitL 10y ago
Sorry, this sounds like a nitpicking. It's akin to saying that Peter Sagan is a loser, because unlike Chris Froome he will never win Tour de France GC. Not to mention Mark Cavendish or Marcel Kittel, who are complete losers. People have various talents and their mental capacity is used best accordingly; if you start forcing them to do work that "hurts them", their best parts disappear, you won't get any results and their lives will be miserable. All because you decided how it must be while ignoring nature. Just out of curiosity, are you a German? I see similar thinking around here a lot.
- notacoward 10y ago
  > if you start forcing them to do work that "hurts them", their best parts disappear, No offense, but this is starting to sound a bit Nietzschean. The ubermensch is how he is. He need not change, bears no responsibility for improving himself or finding another job more suited to strengths and weaknesses, others must accommodate. Bollocks. Skill must be matched with discipline, or else it's worthless. I'm sure your TdF idols would agree. If they couldn't apply discipline to do the job in front of them and to keep getting better at it, they wouldn't be in the Tour de France. > Just out of curiosity, are you a German? I see similar thinking around here a lot. No, but thanks for the stereotype. I know some Germans, I've been to Germany pretty recently, I think I'd fit in pretty well there, but I'm not German. (Actually there might be a percent or two of German blood in there, but there's far more Irish.) It's also pretty ironic that you'd say I seem that way, since you're the one echoing a German philosopher.