3 ms·
There are some interesting ideas in this article. Not using source control and removing tests resulting in a better program is quite fascinating. It's a shame
by brokegrammer 2y ago
There are some interesting ideas in this article. Not using source control and removing tests resulting in a better program is quite fascinating.
It's a shame that there are so many rude comments. It seems like there are many close minded folks lurking here, forgetting that experimentation is essential in tech.
- 082349872349872 2y agoIt's also a shame that Kartik explicitly states his goals and his problem domain, yet folks react as if he'd been making comments about their goals and their problem domain.
- lnenad 2y ago> Not using source control and removing tests resulting in a better program is quite fascinating. Can you clarify what is exactly fascinating here? They seem to be writing simple programs, used only by themselves. In these scenarios of course you don't *have* to use good eng practices.
- brokegrammer 2y agoI don't know because no studies have been done about the so called good engineering practices. If a big company with 10 teams of 20 engineers each blogs about how they're able to ship good code with testing or source control, I won't be any more fascinated that I am here because it sort of makes sense since no one can prove that source control or testing improves the end product.
- akkartik 2y agoYou seem to think of writing simple programs used only by myself (and people I have a relationship with, and people who want to have a relationship with me) as some sort of special situation that doesn't require "good engineering practices." I think of it as the most basic situation of all. The most foundational engineering practice of all: tailor interventions to the context.