2 ms·
I agree that this method might work for statsheet.com, at least in its current incarnation, but it's a bit of a special case. Just because you can rely on spot-
by nathanb 17y ago
I agree that this method might work for statsheet.com, at least in its current incarnation, but it's a bit of a special case. Just because you can rely on spot-checking and only reacting to critical errors when you're strapped for resources doesn't mean it's a good model.
It's like writing a post talking about how you've eaten beans and rice for the past four months. Maybe you needed to do it that way to keep your company afloat, but that doesn't mean that the post constitutes advice.
When bootstrapping a startup a lot of exceptional circumstances occur. Not having resources to test a massive web of pages and data is one of them. The last paragraph of the post makes this clear.
- NathanKP 17y agoJust because you can rely on spot-checking and only reacting to critical errors when you're strapped for resources doesn't mean it's a good model. I agree. The proposed system can track critical errors and syntax errors, but it can't really keep track of logic errors. The stats may not cause any errors but Googlebot can't tell if they are accurate or not.
- RobbieStats 17y agoWhy doesn't it constitute advice? There are lots of entrepreneurs that are strapped for resources. I don't find this as an "exceptional circumstance". My point was simply that it is ok if you don't have 100% test coverage or any automated test coverage. I think that is a waste of resources in a very small startup in many cases.