4 ms·
You are incorrect. In my 18 years in dev, I've seen quite a few of those fabled 10x or 100x devs, and oh boy they can deliver if unconstrained by processes and
by saiya-jin 4y ago
You are incorrect. In my 18 years in dev, I've seen quite a few of those fabled 10x or 100x devs, and oh boy they can deliver if unconstrained by processes and bureaucracy. Rest of the team then scrambles to figure out how things work once they move on to next cool thing.
Always some cool new framework (or even better, one developed just for this situation because its fun). All of them, no exception, loved exploring another framework du jour (and java has/had tons of those) for each project. None of them were 'finishers' - ideal for them would be prototype something quickly, and then move on, daily project grind was universally hated.
Few had to be treated like babies by managers - finding new topics hey can play with to maximize contribution to the project (which often paid off, ie once we got 10x throughput increase compared to default ActiveMQ installation, the guy did some proper debugging/perf testing only possible due to open source nature of the product... brilliant guy, but hardly a team player, complicated personality).
- pdimitar 4y agoI have no doubt such people exist, but you're generalizing needlessly. I've met plenty of senior devs that stick to target and idolize maintainability. No point in insisting that your anecdotal evidence is universal (by asserting "you're incorrect").
- ABCLAW 4y agoIsn't the post he's replying to doing the exact same thing?
- pdimitar 4y agoMaybe it does, I'd still disagree that's its main point however. Obviously claiming extremes is always wrong. But I'd still wager that most people who are indeed senior devs -- myself included -- are long past the "let's try this new thing because reasons!" thing.