4 ms·
I doubt this anecdote. There was no such test in 2011, and I haven't heard any tales from older timers about it either. It sounds like it's conflating some tota
by darren_ 9y ago
I doubt this anecdote. There was no such test in 2011, and I haven't heard any tales from older timers about it either. It sounds like it's conflating some totally optional style-guide-conformance procedures you can do, with permission to check in code at all. And no-one gets to check in code without review regardless of how much expertise you've demonstrated.
- dpark 9y agoI'm not sure why you doubt the anecdote. It's a published quote in a published book by a respected author, and to my knowledge Thompson hasn't refuted the statement. The original quote doesn't have the trashy editorialization. Thompson simply had no need to go through the approval process so he didn't. https://books.google.com/books?id=2kMIqdfyT8kC&pg=PA474&lpg=PA474&ots=MlbvncLJAI&sig=PzQLg4KadXJ0aSxiTlfbvuw2Qdk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjM96qFmc_UAhUQ_WMKHefIDrEQ6AEIITAC https://books.google.com/books?id=2kMIqdfyT8kC&pg=PA474&lpg=... When this was published, it was widely circulated and no one at the time stepped forward to claim it was untrue or that the requirement didn't exist. Given the fact that you make reference to "old timers" in this context, I doubt you were at Google in 2011 and are merely asserting your assumption as a fact.