shados

89 ms·

811.
by shados 9y ago
Yeah, it is a gold rush. It's pretty easy (relatively speaking) to make well over 200k at a public company with some experience if you include stocks. And some people are lured by options of startups (it's a gamble!). It's ha
812.
by shados 9y ago
Call site analysis and such are ways to do that. That's for example the difference between TypeScript and Flow. The later does stuff like that (which is both a boon and a bane. Its amazingly powerful, but you can get into states where
813.
by shados 9y ago
Yup. I think one big issue is that a E2E or an integration test is useful on its own, while a single unit test is almost totally worthless. You don't have confidence of anything until at least 50% (and at 80% you have almost perfect co
814.
by shados 9y ago
I go the complete opposite way. I've tried various testing strategies over 15~ different companies in all sorts of environments, and unit tests are the only thing that really work (IF you can convince the team to do it...and that'
815.
by shados 9y ago
I think a lot of it has to do with people missing the point of Redux, but feeling peer pressured into using it "because its what the cool kids do". I've seen people use Redux and then make a single action, "SET_STATE_AT_
816.
by shados 9y ago
How subjective it is. How 2 groups of equally qualified programmers can look at 10 line of code and completely disagree on how good it is.
817.
by shados 9y ago
Not like they did it first. There's been a few multi threaded JS over the years, and shared memory types are part of the standard, so /shrugs
818.
by shados 9y ago
Yes, Clojure :) I wasn't even thinking the library, but the programming concept when I typoed it. Whoops!
819.
by shados 9y ago
Using ML trough ReasonML + BuckleScript and the related tooling should make ML palatable. Alternatively, F#. That fixes the tooling issue pronto.
820.
by shados 9y ago
Absolutely not. You need a gateway drug before Haskell becomes interesting. It's one of those things where you should not use a solution to a problem until you understand what the problem IS. Otherwise you'll feel like things are
821.
by shados 9y ago
Fair enough. Though we have college diplomas and certifications. People just cheat a lot. Other professions generally have significant checks and balance (eg: inspections after renovation, all the regulations around health care, etc). And e
822.
by shados 9y ago
> Most of the "reverse a binary tree" and "write a linked list" and other problems that use common data structures/algorithms (e.g. depth first search) are pretty bounded sets of problems, surely you could test o
823.
by shados 9y ago
Depending what state you're in, those are often not even enforceable.
824.
by shados 9y ago
Other professions with similar subjective requirements need similar things to get a job (hell, some need it to even be able to get in school). Some you might even be working with on a daily basis and they make a third of your salary. I&#x27
825.
by shados 9y ago
I feel that software engineering in its current state is more of an art than a science (or it's the art of using specific sciences?). It's not understood well enough to say "this is the way to do this thing". Thus all th
826.
by shados 9y ago
I'm not particularly fond of Google or the way they interview, but I've lived just a few blocks from their Cambridge office (so almost every engineer I know around here has interviewed there at one point or another). Aside for the
827.
by shados 9y ago
I once sat down and listed everything I wanted to do that don't really require other people. Not like "watch this TV show", but REALLY want to do. Learning some topics, traveling to certain places, some software projects, etc
828.
by shados 9y ago
They actually do have problems hiring enough. They get tons of applications, but the vast majority are not worth looking at. The people from top schools are in high demand, and Google no longer has monopoly on cool tech workspaces with free
829.
by shados 9y ago
This does bring up an interesting point about the community and its different populations. JS includes _a lot_ of people, of all levels. You don't really have much choice but to do the lowest common denominators (people newer to it pro
830.
by shados 9y ago
> Have you actually tried that? Passing all the props down from child to child to child to child? It's not awesome, I assure you. I honestly think its not that bad. Elm essentially does that, and its arguably more productive than R
831.
by shados 9y ago
Definitely. if an app is just fetching, displaying and mutating data, Relay Modern and Apollo Data are -> that way.
832.
by shados 9y ago
I jumped in the Redux bandwagon after spending the decade before that either in jquery hell (or pre-jquery hell), and eventually Backbone, Angular, and React + Flux. I've touched probably 200+ production frontend apps of various sizes
833.
by shados 9y ago
Pretty much all editors worth talking about support TypeScript's language server. So even if you're using vim or whatever, you get the full featured editing experience (or at least, most of it). That includes proper auto complete.
834.
by shados 9y ago
So people can have a right to visit the inside of your home? Or did you not actually mean every single part?
835.
by shados 9y ago
The social pressure there is off the chart. People don't have a wedding ceremony for themselves it feels like, they have it for everyone else. When we got married, people tried to pressure us. "You have to have a big ceremony so y
836.
by shados 9y ago
The issue is leadership, you're right. But it's not leadership at an individual company level. It's at a community level. Right now, if you're in a tech hub and you tell FE people "Sorry, we're standardizing on
837.
by shados 9y ago
Agreed. Honestly at this point I'll take boring. I'd welcome boring. People really need to stop upgrading 0.1 second after something comes out. Take the Java world. You can have a lot of criticism for the language or the platform,
838.
by shados 9y ago
Literally just "not having kids" makes up for the entire extra time and then some. But really, if you replace things like kids, videogames, netflix, long commutes from the suburbs, spending time with extended families you don&#x27
839.
by shados 9y ago
Yup. It's one of those case we want something to be true, but really, it isn't (always, anyway). Sure, some people are absurdly productive on 25 hours a week. Good for them! Keep at it! Others though, not so much. In programming,
840.
by shados 9y ago
Not really. Most of mines have had stuff like "the employee will work the amount of time needed to get stuff done", worded in legalese. Which is kind of the definition of being salaried, so it makes sense.

More ›