|
It depends on "why are they bad?". Someone who still learning will make some mistakes (everybody has done some poor and ugly coding).
The big problem is when things are bad and the developer don't care or don't review his (or her) work.
|
|
|
|
|
Diana NoWay wrote: It depends on "why are they bad?". Someone who still learning will make some mistakes (everybody has done some poor and ugly coding).
Exactly, a bad developer is one who doesn't care and doesn't learn from mistakes. We all make mistakes, you should see some of mine!
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Mistakes do not make you bad. Everyone makes mistakes or even writes code that won't work as envisioned.
I've had to work with some really bad programmers, although mostly it seems I get to follow behind them and clean up their messes.
What's a bad programmer for me?
One that doesn't even understand what they are writing. I was given some code this programmer had written before he went on vacation, he swore up and down that he had tested it. Didn't come close to working. I gutted it down to 1/3rd of its original size and when he got back from vacation I showed it to him. He didn't even see where I had made any changes.
Another one thought if the program crashed, it was the user's fault.
But the worst for me have been the ones that convince management they are God's Gift to Programming ard produce something that barely works and then moves on, leaving me to seemingly whine to management about the crap code and how resistant it is to even simple changes without crashing the entire program. You know, writing a subroutine that does 10 things and then call it because you are only interested in 2 of the things it does and you hope the other 8 don't step on anything important.
Sorry, I'm getting off on to a rant that could go for pages.
To me, the only advantage of a bad programmer is that they teach what not to do.
Psychosis at 10
Film at 11
Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it.
Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.
|
|
|
|
|
Seems like the argument is "bad developers shouldn't use frameworks, because bad developers don't use frameworks".
|
|
|
|
|
Good developers shouldn't use frameworks either.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, good developers do not need Frameworks !!!
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry. This is an incoherent rant.
|
|
|
|
|
Bad developers should also never be allowed to BUILD frameworks. I've experienced the outcome from this first hand. It was horrifying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL, been there! I once worked with a guy who was obsessed with frameworks, he wrote an in-house one that was critical to our business. Only, he never finished it, or any other project he started. It was a horror show of method stubs and debugging code and commented-out changes, and this was in production! He refused to fix any bugs or complete needed functionality, considering that someone else's job, so the other programmers were forced to work around the problems or make the fixes themselves.
He also liked to use frameworks for totally unnecessary applications, like for a simple SFTP client to pull an import file, a tool I was once forced to use. It was a ridiculous error-prone mess with objects being passed through seven layers of hell when there was no reason for abstraction in the first place. I ended up removing the reference to his code and just wrote some simple reliable code to do the basic SFTP pull (I suspect that he wanted me to use his tool so I would get tagged with ownership and maintain it for him--not it!).
As for the article, though, I'm not sure what the guy was getting at. Frameworks are tools, it depends on how they are used. That's true of all tools in programming, including the languages themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
Incoherent argument. What was the point? I've read a few of this person's posts and after reading them I'm always left with the feeling that they must be terrible to work with.
|
|
|
|
|
This is a useless argument that is there just to boost the author Adds income.
If one is a bad professional he shouldn't be doing it, period!
But life isn't as simple as this and we all know how it goes and we have to live with it.
Everyone at least once looked at he's own code some months later and thought:
"S**t! What was I thinking when I wrote this?!"
Architects
Here we're speaking about developers, but these are far from being the one that really weight on bad software at the end.
For me, bad Architects (or the lack of a defined architecture) can damage much more than a bad developer.
On top of the damage, a bad architecture is much harder to rollback than just a piece of bad written code.
Project Leadership
Bad of lack of project leadership leads to bad developers "perception".
You might be a good developer but if you don't have the right info to work with you might end up writing bad code and not even knowing it.
Frameworks
There's a lot to say about this but bottom line is that Frameworks are never the problem.
In fact they help to encapsulate logic that most of the time we would end up writing anyway so what's the problem?
The problem is the same as Googling and Copy/Paste. Using them blindly, without caring about what they really do underneath.
Of course, at the end it's easy to blame who actually stroke the keys and code the damn mess, but I've seen much more crappy software than crappy developers and this should mean something...
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
AlexCode wrote: Frameworks are never the problem.
I would beg to differ but MFC doesn't provide a way to do that with making a fool of yourself.
AlexCode wrote: Using them blindly, without caring about what they really do underneath.
Agree 100% but of course this can only be solved if the framework itself is transparent, open source and well documented.
I do framework development because it's hard and therefore a good way to learn. 10 years and I'm still learning exactly how hard it is.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage."
Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
|
|
|
|
|
Based on this article, I'd say bad writers shouldn't use blog engines.
|
|
|
|
|
Framework that can be used only by expert developers is probably not so good
|
|
|
|
|
The same goes for API's...
|
|
|
|
|
Too much judgemental boasting by this piece of blogger.
Or maybe he just wants to let everyone know that he knows about validation?
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
No, he really just wants the Adds income...
|
|
|
|
|
He should hit a nail on his head, this is a useless rant and on top of that incoherent.
|
|
|
|
|
Bad Developers Should NOT develop, in any case
|
|
|
|
|
At TechEd North America Microsoft announced a wave of products and services that will help customers embrace the “enterprise cloud era.” The next version of theirdata platform – SQL Server 2014 – is a key part of the day’s news. Designed and developed with our cloud-first principles in mind, it delivers built-in in-memory capabilities, new hybrid cloud scenarios and enables even faster data insights.
SQL Server 2014
Deependra
|
|
|
|
|
It's the bane of most programmers' lives - an unhandled exception causes your application or webapp to crash, an ugly dialog gets displayed to the user, and they come complaining to you. Then, somehow, you need to figure out what went wrong.... However, it's good that the program crashed. Or, more precisely, it is correct behaviour. An unhandled exception in your application means that, somewhere in your code, there is an assumption that you made that is actually invalid. Fail early, fail often... fail spectacularly if that's what it takes to learn.
|
|
|
|
|
I have now worked at a bunch of companies, and consulted for quote a few. I have looked at some pretty horrible code. Every company I visit with say the same thing: Yeah, but our code really sucks. It does not suck more than other code I have seen. It usually sucks about as much. Do a thought experiment: Of the ugly code you’ve seen,: when was it written? How long has it been alive? Most of the time, I have seen ugly code that started a good few years ago. Your hacky code is now a big business. Now you can make it pretty.
|
|
|
|
|
Nope, ugly code means your big successful company is about to miss the 'next big thing' or be so late to the party it costs eye watering ammounts of money to get in. If you're big and successful now you've got about 5 minutes to start doing it properly or you won't be big and successful any more. Yes you invested everything you had in that pile of hacks and it made you your first million. It won't make you your second million even if you invest everything you've now got in it. Sit down with an empty computer, take a deep breath, smell the , remember everything you learned last time and start again.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage."
Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Faithfull wrote: Sit down with an empty computer, take a deep breath, smell the [Coffee] , remember
everything you learned last time and start again.
A company selling an ERP package named BPCS did exactly that.
It was about a $400 million company, if memory serves me right.
BPCS ran on the IBM AS/400.
They took the advice of programmers/consultants or whatever and decided to rewrite the whole thing under Unix.
The company went belly up a few years later.
Programmers will tell you that RPG is a bad language, that the future belongs to C, C++, Java or C++11.
Now they are telling you that the future belongs to Scala, Haskell, Clojure, or PHP, HTML 5, etc.
They all had a future that lasted 5-10 years. But for the power of stupid people in large numbers, these languages would not have lived one year.
Write a stable system that does its job well. You can continue using the software forever.
You don't believe me? Ask the Wall Street stock brokerages what language their trade accounting software is written in.
|
|
|
|