4 ms·

A common experience (mostly in the Pacific North West) I have had is to implement a feature in a straightforward manner that works with minimal code, for some b

A common experience (mostly in the Pacific North West) I have had is to implement a feature in a straightforward manner that works with minimal code, for some backlog issue. Then I'm told the PR will be looked at. A couple days later I am told this is not the way to do X. You must do it Y? Why Y? Because of historical battles won and lost why, not because of a specific characteristic. My PR doesn't work with Y and it would be more complicated...like who knows what multiplier of code to make it work. Well that makes it a harder task than your estimate, which is why nobody ever took it up before and was really excited about your low estimate. How does Y work? Well it works specifically to prevent features like X. How am I supposed to know how to modify Y in a way that satisfies the invisible soft requirements? Someone more senior takes over my ticket, while I'm assigned unit tests. They end up writing a few hundred lines of code for Y2.0 then implement X with a copy paste of a few lines. I must not be "a good fit". Welcome to the next 6-12 months of not caring about this job at all, while I find another job without my resume starting to look like patchwork. Challenging people's egos by providing a simpler implementation for something someone says is very hard, has been effective at getting old stagnant issues completed. Unnaturally effective. Of course, those new "right way" features are just as ugly as any existing feature, ensuring the perpetuation of the code complexity. Continually writing themselves into corners they don't want to mess with.

dasil003 2y ago
Hard for me to comment definitively here since I don't have the other side of the story, but I will say that I have seen teams operating based on all kinds of assumed constraints where we lose sight of the ultimate objective of building systems that serve human needs. I've definintely seen cases where the true cost of technical debt is over-represented due to a lack of trust between between business stakeholders and engineering, and those kind of scenarios could definintely lead to this kind of rote engineering policy detached from reality. Without knowledge of your specific company and team I can't offer any more specific advice other than to say that I think your viewpoint of the big picture sounds reasonable and would resonate in a healthy software company with competent leadership. Your current company may not be that, but rest assured that such companies do exist! Never lose that common sense grounding, as that way madness lies. Good luck in finding a place where your experience and pragmatism is valued and recognized!
eru 2y ago
I feel your pain. But I guess you need to work harder on detecting these kinds of work places upfront, instead of joining them one after another?
- Supermancho 2y ago
  Generally, companies filter out candidates who request to look at any measurable amount of source code as part of the process. Larger companies leveragethe 6-12 mo contractor to hire. You are still stuck there until you are not. These topics are common knowledge, if you have interviewed in the last 5 to 10 years. I have been working for 25, so I find the blame trying to be redirected, by some, misguided.
  - eru 2y ago
    Yes, you can't directly look at the source code (unless you pick companies that open source a lot). But I was more thinking of trying to develop some proxy metrics that you can measure; the most common being asking the right questions in the interview. But you can also try to look for other tells.
liontwist 2y ago
This sounds like you are missing important context. Here is a similar conversation: "Why do I have to use the system button class. I implemented my own and it works." "Because when the OS updates with new behavior your button may break or not get new styling and functionality" "But this works and meets the spec, that's 10x harder"
- Supermancho 2y ago
  More like we have to use the god object to make all http calls for consistency in logging, despite this being a gcp pubsub.
  - liontwist 2y ago
    Find the context you are missing and if it’s bad reason you will understand their perspective more and be able to persuade them.

dasil003 2y ago

Hard for me to comment definitively here since I don't have the other side of the story, but I will say that I have seen teams operating based on all kinds of assumed constraints where we lose sight of the ultimate objective of building systems that serve human needs. I've definintely seen cases where the true cost of technical debt is over-represented due to a lack of trust between between business stakeholders and engineering, and those kind of scenarios could definintely lead to this kind of rote engineering policy detached from reality. Without knowledge of your specific company and team I can't offer any more specific advice other than to say that I think your viewpoint of the big picture sounds reasonable and would resonate in a healthy software company with competent leadership. Your current company may not be that, but rest assured that such companies do exist! Never lose that common sense grounding, as that way madness lies. Good luck in finding a place where your experience and pragmatism is valued and recognized!

eru 2y ago

I feel your pain. But I guess you need to work harder on detecting these kinds of work places upfront, instead of joining them one after another?

Supermancho 2y ago
Generally, companies filter out candidates who request to look at any measurable amount of source code as part of the process. Larger companies leveragethe 6-12 mo contractor to hire. You are still stuck there until you are not. These topics are common knowledge, if you have interviewed in the last 5 to 10 years. I have been working for 25, so I find the blame trying to be redirected, by some, misguided.
- eru 2y ago
  Yes, you can't directly look at the source code (unless you pick companies that open source a lot). But I was more thinking of trying to develop some proxy metrics that you can measure; the most common being asking the right questions in the interview. But you can also try to look for other tells.

liontwist 2y ago

This sounds like you are missing important context. Here is a similar conversation: "Why do I have to use the system button class. I implemented my own and it works." "Because when the OS updates with new behavior your button may break or not get new styling and functionality" "But this works and meets the spec, that's 10x harder"

Supermancho 2y ago
More like we have to use the god object to make all http calls for consistency in logging, despite this being a gcp pubsub.
- liontwist 2y ago
  Find the context you are missing and if it’s bad reason you will understand their perspective more and be able to persuade them.