Skip Navigation

Posts
27
Comments
451
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • You could say you're in good company

  • You point to Valve as a success story, but the "pick the work you want" also lead to less deliverables and focus and they had to refocus that approach. Free pick and experimentation is fine until you get to a point where you want to get something out the door - when it's a bigger thing, and you need more and focused people, to bring it to the finish line.


    I can't speak how it would be elsewhere and everywhere, but I can speak from personal experience how my workplace is set up.

    We're relatively small, work for various customers, some continuous and some contract-scoped. Developers work and speak either directly to and with customers, or have at most one person "in between" that is part of usually our team.

    We have an agile and collaborative mindset, and often guide our customers into productive workflows.

    Being on relatively small teams, with opportunity for high personal impact, and with agency, I was able to take initiative and work in a way I am very satisfied with. I am able to prioritize myself, collaborate with my customer to understand their needs, understandings, and priorities, and then make my decisions - explicitly or implicitly. Two-week plannings give good checkpoints to review and reassess intended priorities - which are only guides. Stuff comes up that takes priority anyway, be it from the customer, or improving code when you stumble upon it.

    I'm glad to be on my current team where the customer pays monthly for how much we worked, so no repeated contract work estimation. I can and do decide on what makes sense, and we communicate on priorities, planning, and consequences. Either I decide or we discuss whether one or another solution makes more sense considering effort, significance, and degree of solution or acceptableness. One person from the customer is our direct gate to them, participates in meetings, planning, tickets, prioritization. They block all of their requests to us, and communicate to and with us on what they deem important enough. And they are our gateway to asking the customers roles and people regarding usage, functionality, needs, etc.

    For me, this environment is perfect. It allows me to collaborate with the customers to match their long term needs.

    I think it needs good enough developers though. There's those that are mindful and actively invested, but also people who are not. Some become great productive workers with guidance and experience, but it doesn't always fit. I feel like a lack of proactive good development given the environment and agency isn't a given, but I don't think "management" improves that. You're putting a manager on top in hopes they're a person like that. But why couldn't that be a team member in the first place?

    Managers and more strict role splitting becomes more necessary or efficient the bigger you scale. I feel like smaller projects and teams are more efficient and satisfactory. You have less people and communication interfaces. And as a developer, you probably know that interfaces [between systems] are one of the biggest issue causers.

    For context, I am Lead Developer (became when we introduced those roles explicitly), and our team size was 2 for a long time, but has now been 4 for a while, and is now 3 developers +1 now in semi-retirement working only half of the year.

  • make bare got repositories

    got it

  • I did a bunch of other experiments, which didn't make things faster:

    Also particularly interesting what didn't work.

  • They have the blog post date in the title but I don't see it on the page. Header head nor bottom.

  • Personally, I would like to see LINQ query syntax and LINQ method syntax separated too. Because I find method syntax very useful (for simple or linear-spread-cascading queries), but I find query syntax hard to read and reason. Even worse so when it introduces variables. I don't want to see it anywhere in my projects. But method syntax has clear reasoning borders and I enjoy using it (up to a certain query complexity).

  • Do we list it in both categories then? Query languages and scripting languages?

  • Would Nushell qualify as a query language?

    At the same time, it's a scripting and programming language. Statements and commands are chained to query data.

  • I also wasn’t aware of the survey at all and wonder how people even know about it.

    The StackOverflow gave a notification. IIRC they sent out emails as well. It was shared on Lemmy too.

    I don't find the results that questionable at all. Feels like you have a strong niche bias. Which is fine, as long as you don't assume you know better than a global survey on a popular industry platform.

    There could be bias, but I don't see it being that big. Microsoft is very popular in the enterprise field.

  • Yeah, I see they did mention "your languages functions". It's just, subjectively, reading awk and sed next to "easily" irritates me. Because I've never found it easy to get into those.

  • Fully committed to directory file structure. Except for value lists. Those are text files you have to parse anyway.

  • My biggest issue is with how spread out the information will be. You need something other than your standard file and directory explorers. Because you want to see and work with a view across multiple levels of directories and files and their content.

  • You can easily parse this using awk, sed, fzf,

    Well… I would know how to do it easily in C# or Nushell. But those tools? Maybe it's easy when you're already intuitively familiar with them. But line/string splitting seems anything but with complex utils like that with many params and a custom syntax.

  • the ability to override menu keys is really a long-running flaw in browser UI

    They have a reason to do so here though. OP evaded their search box and couldn't find the content. Because it's not fully rendered. Because code files can get big, and rendering them to DOM with inline highlighting and hover actions, sidebar with infos, and interactivity becomes a performance problem. So they implement partial rendering / virtual scrolling.

  • The only issue they mention is browser page text search not working on rendered file view (blame).

    The feels legacy conclusion doesn't make any sense to me.

    GitHub is not the only platform implementing virtual scrolling, partial rendering of rendered files. There's a reason they do that: Files can get big, and adding various code highlighting and interactivity costs performance. It's not a local code representation and rendered canvas. It's rendered into a DOM and DOM representation, with markup and attached logic. Which at some point quickly becomes very inefficient or costly.

    Not being able to use the browser text search is an unfortunate side effect.

    I consider it a worsening modernization/feature addition. That's the opposite of legacy. We're moving forward (in a bad way), not stagnating.

    When I click Blame, and then press Ctrl+F, it opens not my browser text search but the in-page in-file search. It works for me. (Not that I always use that search or like it.)

  • Legacy means outdated. Not [necessarily] unusable or unstable or insecure or needs to be updated. But feels old or outdated. Conforming to older standards or workflows.

    Wikipedia matches my understanding:

    In computing, a legacy system is an old method, technology, computer system, or application program, "of, relating to, or being a previous or outdated computer system", yet still in use.

  • I was thinking "oh, network view, this is gonna be a good example", but that comparison isn't.

    What specifically do you think is legacy in that comparison? The coloring? The horizontal layout? The whitespace?

    The network view lays out forks and their branches, not only [local]/[local+1-remote] branches.

    I don't know what IDE that miro screenshot is from. But I see it as wasteful and confusing. The author initials are useless and wasteful, picking away focus. The branch labels are far off from the branch heads. The coloring seems confusing.

    bg looks like the same

  • One of the fixes was deleting a sysm32 driver file. Is a Windows driver how they update definitions?