3 ms·

My subjective personal experience: * good developers seem to be more pissed off by poor code. Seems easy to explain -- people tend to do better when they care

My subjective personal experience: * good developers seem to be more pissed off by poor code. Seems easy to explain -- people tend to do better when they care about what they are doing. * even better ones seem to be more accepting people with varying ability to write code and spend more effort trying to help them make the best with their abilities, * poor developers tend to try to make up for their perceived inadequacies by trying to look more professional in other ways (like behaving "professionally", dressing better, using marketingspeak on meetings, etc.) * on the other hand large portion of developers have inflated egos and thing they are super good while really writing crappy code and not even understanding why it is crappy. I worked with two guys at two separate companies who were both lead developers and were saying they are best developers in the world. Both super confident and this helped them to advance. One of them was fired when the entire library they brought in as an "asset" failed spectacularly because it parsed XML messages by extracting "n characters from m line at n offset" rather than doing actual XML parsing.

TN1ck 4y ago
> poor developers tend to try to make up for their perceived inadequacies by trying to look more professional in other ways (like behaving "professionally", dressing better, using marketingspeak on meetings, etc.) I would actually look more into their "professional" behavior purely from a code viewpoint. As an example, I once had a coding interview submission that I was looking through and at first sight it seemed everything is there, tests, code comments, framework patters. My first thought was "Oh nice, they really are thorough". But looking deeper at it, these things hid the actual problems. E.g. The function interfaces were poor and mixed side effects when not necessary, tests tested _something_, but not what was important. And the algorithmic challenge wasn't even really attempted. This made me acutely aware of how easy this person could have passed a less technical interviewer, as everything looked professional. The effects are worse that someone whose obviously a junior or poor coder, their code looks off at first sight.
trieste92 4y ago
> poor developers tend to try to make up for their perceived inadequacies by trying to look more professional in other ways (like behaving "professionally", dressing better, using marketingspeak on meetings, etc.) Don't forget: - trying to solve things in a "clever" non idiomatic way instead of being clear and idiomatic - gravitating towards non coding tasks

TN1ck 4y ago

> poor developers tend to try to make up for their perceived inadequacies by trying to look more professional in other ways (like behaving "professionally", dressing better, using marketingspeak on meetings, etc.) I would actually look more into their "professional" behavior purely from a code viewpoint. As an example, I once had a coding interview submission that I was looking through and at first sight it seemed everything is there, tests, code comments, framework patters. My first thought was "Oh nice, they really are thorough". But looking deeper at it, these things hid the actual problems. E.g. The function interfaces were poor and mixed side effects when not necessary, tests tested _something_, but not what was important. And the algorithmic challenge wasn't even really attempted. This made me acutely aware of how easy this person could have passed a less technical interviewer, as everything looked professional. The effects are worse that someone whose obviously a junior or poor coder, their code looks off at first sight.

trieste92 4y ago

> poor developers tend to try to make up for their perceived inadequacies by trying to look more professional in other ways (like behaving "professionally", dressing better, using marketingspeak on meetings, etc.) Don't forget: - trying to solve things in a "clever" non idiomatic way instead of being clear and idiomatic - gravitating towards non coding tasks