5 ms·

I disagree with you, wholeheartedly. One of the problems you are facing is code quality, which you've eloquently solved by code review (LOL), but the other, mo

I disagree with you, wholeheartedly. One of the problems you are facing is code quality, which you've eloquently solved by code review (LOL), but the other, more burning matter is, you are no longer in control of your own software. -- hey now, I DID actually read all the code we brought in I mean, sure, that's a possibility. I don't believe you, but that's besides the point. The point, being, and here's a news flash for you corporate peps out there who love to "manage my team of peps using stuff I learned from someone I talked to at a bar"... Nothing is free in this world, not even code. The shortcuts you are making aren't really shortcuts. Instead, they will become your doom.

eyelidlessness 4y ago
> you are no longer in control of your own software I don’t own any software. To the extent I ever have, I rescind my copyright. There. No more problems!
EddySchauHai 4y ago
How do you find work when you only use your own bootstrapped language on your own OS using your own FPGA board? And do you find difficulties getting your colleagues to use your own VCS? /s In all seriousness I get your point, code supply chains are volatile beasts that can blow up, but it's the only realistic way to write code nowadays. You can reduce external libraries and tools as a tradeoff for time/cost or you can fork tools to host yourself, etc... These are all tradeoffs that shouldn't be seen in black and white!
- kreeben 4y ago
  >> it's the only realistic way to write code nowadays That's repulsive. You could hold that position, if you wanted to, because the world seems that way, doesn't it? But i don't believe even for a fraction of a second, that you are right to say so.
  - EddySchauHai 4y ago
    One example, do you roll your own crypto?
    - kreeben 4y ago
      We're discussing React in this thread, are we not? What's the name of that fallacy where you put emphasis on a whole other topic, so that your point still stands?
      - EddySchauHai 4y ago
        >> Nothing is free in this world, not even code. The shortcuts you are making aren't really shortcuts. Instead, they will become your doom. > We're discussing React in this thread, are we not? So, by this, what you mean is purely limited to React? Or FE code? Or code in general?
        kreeben 4y ago
        You got me. I was actually talking about code in general but then I threw the wrong card at you, because you had me cornered and I panicked. Please accept my apologies. But I'm still in the right and you're still in the wrong. Because what you are saying is "my disciples, go into the night and depend on whatever you may, because depending on things is the way, for I will be rich if you do." 'Tis not the way. Is all I'm sayeth.
the_af 4y ago
Taken to an extreme, this must also mean you only use code you write yourself, since your coworkers will probably not be able to code up to your standards. You are eternally reinventing the wheel, and missing the opportunity to work on the actual feature/app in a timely way. If this just means being selective about dependencies, I'm sure most of us here will agree.
- kreeben 4y ago
  No, what I mean is, you, good sir or madam, is intentionally straw manning what I said in order to make it OK, in your mind, to have people depend on black boxes ("nmp packages") because that would make your boss happier.
  - the_af 4y ago
    I know this is not exactly what you said, I'm taking it to an extreme to show that relying on third party libs is not that different from relying on code your coworkers write. Rejecting useful libraries because you "are not in control" means you're constantly reinventing the wheel, which means you're wasting time. My boss doesn't care whether I use third party libs or my own code, and I bet yours doesn't either. They care about results. You simply cannot deliver if you write every piece of your stack from scratch.
faeriechangling 4y ago
>you are no longer in control of your own software. In a business setting you have no control over what will happen with your software in the long run, and somebody else will take over for you, so this is an INCREDIBLY weak justification for not using libraries. One of the major appeals of libraries is that the very fact you can figure out how to use them means that somebody else can. That’s something you can’t say about your own code as easily. If you don’t reuse other peoples code, how can you know the first thing about writing code other people can reuse? Not using other peoples libraries is akin to being a chef that will only eat their own food.
- kreeben 4y ago
  >> you have no control over what will happen with your software Can you please go directly to your boss's office and tell him that you are not even close to being in control of the objectives he told you at the convention, that you should have, if you want that bonus we've been talking about?
  - faeriechangling 4y ago
    I’m not a software god. I am unable to impose my will upon any codebase I have ever touched for eternity. I admit somebody is eventually going to rewrite and refactor and extend my shit code which was written with the curse of knowledge, minimal review, minimal testing, and never having to handle more than a narrow set of use cases. Code which may have been easier to write and more efficient than the libraries available but that is going to be thrown out when somebody has to maintain my handwritten JavaScript framework replacement and goes “what the fuck”. Somebody who only uses their own code has awful taste in code.
    - kreeben 4y ago
      This is a delightful rebuttal and I applaud you for it. I hereby withdraw any claims I might have made with regards to the topic at hand because you have clearly the upper hand on what is right and what is simply nonsense. I wish your upcoming corporate day to be a blissful one. No, that last sentence was way to illfull. Sorry for inventing a new word. It means "full of ill".

eyelidlessness 4y ago

> you are no longer in control of your own software I don’t own any software. To the extent I ever have, I rescind my copyright. There. No more problems!

EddySchauHai 4y ago

How do you find work when you only use your own bootstrapped language on your own OS using your own FPGA board? And do you find difficulties getting your colleagues to use your own VCS? /s In all seriousness I get your point, code supply chains are volatile beasts that can blow up, but it's the only realistic way to write code nowadays. You can reduce external libraries and tools as a tradeoff for time/cost or you can fork tools to host yourself, etc... These are all tradeoffs that shouldn't be seen in black and white!

kreeben 4y ago
>> it's the only realistic way to write code nowadays That's repulsive. You could hold that position, if you wanted to, because the world seems that way, doesn't it? But i don't believe even for a fraction of a second, that you are right to say so.
- EddySchauHai 4y ago
  One example, do you roll your own crypto?
  - kreeben 4y ago
    We're discussing React in this thread, are we not? What's the name of that fallacy where you put emphasis on a whole other topic, so that your point still stands?
    - EddySchauHai 4y ago
      >> Nothing is free in this world, not even code. The shortcuts you are making aren't really shortcuts. Instead, they will become your doom. > We're discussing React in this thread, are we not? So, by this, what you mean is purely limited to React? Or FE code? Or code in general?
      - kreeben 4y ago
        You got me. I was actually talking about code in general but then I threw the wrong card at you, because you had me cornered and I panicked. Please accept my apologies. But I'm still in the right and you're still in the wrong. Because what you are saying is "my disciples, go into the night and depend on whatever you may, because depending on things is the way, for I will be rich if you do." 'Tis not the way. Is all I'm sayeth.

the_af 4y ago

Taken to an extreme, this must also mean you only use code you write yourself, since your coworkers will probably not be able to code up to your standards. You are eternally reinventing the wheel, and missing the opportunity to work on the actual feature/app in a timely way. If this just means being selective about dependencies, I'm sure most of us here will agree.

kreeben 4y ago
No, what I mean is, you, good sir or madam, is intentionally straw manning what I said in order to make it OK, in your mind, to have people depend on black boxes ("nmp packages") because that would make your boss happier.
- the_af 4y ago
  I know this is not exactly what you said, I'm taking it to an extreme to show that relying on third party libs is not that different from relying on code your coworkers write. Rejecting useful libraries because you "are not in control" means you're constantly reinventing the wheel, which means you're wasting time. My boss doesn't care whether I use third party libs or my own code, and I bet yours doesn't either. They care about results. You simply cannot deliver if you write every piece of your stack from scratch.

faeriechangling 4y ago

>you are no longer in control of your own software. In a business setting you have no control over what will happen with your software in the long run, and somebody else will take over for you, so this is an INCREDIBLY weak justification for not using libraries. One of the major appeals of libraries is that the very fact you can figure out how to use them means that somebody else can. That’s something you can’t say about your own code as easily. If you don’t reuse other peoples code, how can you know the first thing about writing code other people can reuse? Not using other peoples libraries is akin to being a chef that will only eat their own food.

kreeben 4y ago
>> you have no control over what will happen with your software Can you please go directly to your boss's office and tell him that you are not even close to being in control of the objectives he told you at the convention, that you should have, if you want that bonus we've been talking about?
- faeriechangling 4y ago
  I’m not a software god. I am unable to impose my will upon any codebase I have ever touched for eternity. I admit somebody is eventually going to rewrite and refactor and extend my shit code which was written with the curse of knowledge, minimal review, minimal testing, and never having to handle more than a narrow set of use cases. Code which may have been easier to write and more efficient than the libraries available but that is going to be thrown out when somebody has to maintain my handwritten JavaScript framework replacement and goes “what the fuck”. Somebody who only uses their own code has awful taste in code.
  - kreeben 4y ago
    This is a delightful rebuttal and I applaud you for it. I hereby withdraw any claims I might have made with regards to the topic at hand because you have clearly the upper hand on what is right and what is simply nonsense. I wish your upcoming corporate day to be a blissful one. No, that last sentence was way to illfull. Sorry for inventing a new word. It means "full of ill".