4 ms·
I second, too. Also: > More generally, though, it shows why there's a difference between 1x and 10x programmers. While I agree that some of the examples are i
by attractivechaos 10y ago
I second, too. Also:
> More generally, though, it shows why there's a difference between 1x and 10x programmers.
While I agree that some of the examples are impropriate, I think OP has generalized the issue too far. I don't believe knowing how to use assert properly has much contribution to productivity in programming.
- imron 10y ago> I don't believe knowing how to use assert properly has much contribution to productivity in programming. It's a symptom of the problem, not the cause. It demonstrates that they don't really understand the code they are writing, and it's that attitude and approach to programming that has a contribution to productivity.
- attractivechaos 10y agoThis comes back to xutopia's comment. Almost every programmer has blind spots. It is often biased to judge the overall capability of a programmer just by looking at these minor spots. If a programmer is particularly good at breaking a complex problem down to manageable subtasks but knows little about assert, he/she could still be a 10x programmer. The thing is: it is easy to evaluate the proper use of assert, but it is much harder to evaluate the capability to solve complex real-world problems.
- CJefferson 10y agoThe programmer who wrote 3 out of the 4 complained about things invented bitcoin. Do you think they are productive enough?
- imron 10y ago> The programmer who wrote 3 out of the 4 complained about things invented bitcoin That doesn't make him a good programmer. In fact it's entirely possible to be a brilliant cryptographer but only an average programmer.