3 ms·

> But where do we draw the line? Well, we can draw the line based on who is going to maintain the code after we are gone. If we know that the organization is o

> But where do we draw the line? Well, we can draw the line based on who is going to maintain the code after we are gone. If we know that the organization is only going to hire rockstar ninja experts, then we can make code that is readable for rockstar ninja experts. If we know that the organization is going to hire mediocre developers, then we need to make code that is understandable by mediocre developers. If you think mediocre developers can't understand streams, then don't use streams. (Personally I think your examples of interfaces, exception handling, and streams, are all things that have their time and place, so it would be fine to use them when needed, and just expect that developers after you will know/learn that stuff.)

908B64B197 5y ago
> If we know that the organization is going to hire mediocre developers, then we need to make code that is understandable by mediocre developers. There's a secret third option: The organization could just hire good devs.
- baobabKoodaa 5y ago
  > There's a secret third option: The organization could just hire good devs. That's rarely up to the individual developer to decide. If you cook a complex bowl of abstraction soup, knowing that mediocre developers will maintain it after you, that's on your conscience.
  - pojzon 5y ago
    The evaluation objective for those medicore devs should be to „get up to speed” or the company will never improve and soon become overrun by competition.
    - baobabKoodaa 5y ago
      Aha. And should every single company employ above-average developers? How does that work out, mathematically?
      - 908B64B197 5y ago
        It doesn't: The average startup goes bankrupt.
        baobabKoodaa 5y ago
        The average corporation doesn't go bankrupt, so you moved the goalpost from "corporation" to "startup". Ok, sure. So, in your view, a developer who leaves behind over-architected complexity to "mediocre" developers is a surefire recipe for going bankrupt... and this was supposed to be in defense of overarchitecting complex codebases? To me it sounds like going bankrupt is bad, so we as developers should strive to prevent our employers from going bankrupt, no? So if you work for a startup that you know is going to hire mediocre developers after you, surely you should strive to leave behind the kind of codebase that doesn't bankrupt the company after you leave?
        908B64B197 5y ago
        > The average corporation doesn't go bankrupt, so you moved the goalpost from "corporation" to "startup". For a lot of corporations, making the jump to software is effectively starting a new company within the company. > To me it sounds like going bankrupt is bad, so we as developers should strive to prevent our employers from going bankrupt, no? Bad hires tank companies. > So if you work for a startup that you know is going to hire mediocre developers after you, surely you should strive to leave behind the kind of codebase that doesn't bankrupt the company after you leave? That's a red flag right here. It means sell your RSU as soon as you can.
        baobabKoodaa 5y ago
        > Bad hires tank companies. We weren't talking about bad hires, we were talking about mediocre hires. It seems like you expect all companies to higher above-average developers, even though that is mathematically impossible.
        5y ago

908B64B197 5y ago

> If we know that the organization is going to hire mediocre developers, then we need to make code that is understandable by mediocre developers. There's a secret third option: The organization could just hire good devs.

baobabKoodaa 5y ago
> There's a secret third option: The organization could just hire good devs. That's rarely up to the individual developer to decide. If you cook a complex bowl of abstraction soup, knowing that mediocre developers will maintain it after you, that's on your conscience.
- pojzon 5y ago
  The evaluation objective for those medicore devs should be to „get up to speed” or the company will never improve and soon become overrun by competition.
  - baobabKoodaa 5y ago
    Aha. And should every single company employ above-average developers? How does that work out, mathematically?
    - 908B64B197 5y ago
      It doesn't: The average startup goes bankrupt.
      - baobabKoodaa 5y ago
        The average corporation doesn't go bankrupt, so you moved the goalpost from "corporation" to "startup". Ok, sure. So, in your view, a developer who leaves behind over-architected complexity to "mediocre" developers is a surefire recipe for going bankrupt... and this was supposed to be in defense of overarchitecting complex codebases? To me it sounds like going bankrupt is bad, so we as developers should strive to prevent our employers from going bankrupt, no? So if you work for a startup that you know is going to hire mediocre developers after you, surely you should strive to leave behind the kind of codebase that doesn't bankrupt the company after you leave?
        908B64B197 5y ago
        > The average corporation doesn't go bankrupt, so you moved the goalpost from "corporation" to "startup". For a lot of corporations, making the jump to software is effectively starting a new company within the company. > To me it sounds like going bankrupt is bad, so we as developers should strive to prevent our employers from going bankrupt, no? Bad hires tank companies. > So if you work for a startup that you know is going to hire mediocre developers after you, surely you should strive to leave behind the kind of codebase that doesn't bankrupt the company after you leave? That's a red flag right here. It means sell your RSU as soon as you can.
        baobabKoodaa 5y ago
        > Bad hires tank companies. We weren't talking about bad hires, we were talking about mediocre hires. It seems like you expect all companies to higher above-average developers, even though that is mathematically impossible.
        5y ago