|
Of carnal knowledge I acquired such a grip
They took me into the censorship
And the junior censorship, I ween
Was the only ship I ever had seen
(With apologies to A. Sullivan)
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
modified 4-Jun-19 13:44pm.
|
|
|
|
|
The quality of your puns is sinking, therefore we bow and wave.
Hmm. What's OriginalGriff an antialias for anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Wheeler wrote: What's OriginalGriff an antialias for anyway?
CounterfeitGriff?
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
One of the developers is giving me a hard time now.
We have a simple proto to be developed.
Two modules, each having 3 screens.
We just need 6 APIs altogether.
3 for each module.
The developer is so stuck with the "CRUD" idea in mind.
That he cannot resist developing all the Create, Read, Update, Delete & all the fancy REST operations Put, Patch.
I just needed a Create API to populate the data. Nobody cares if the data is deletable or updateable.
I just needed 3 APIs for the first module & then move on two the 2nd module.
Now he's writing the 6th API for the *first module*,  Validating and checking a lot of scenarios for update & delete. 
Sometimes perfectionism is a curse.
modified 4-Jun-19 9:04am.
|
|
|
|
|
Nand32 wrote: Sometimes perfectionism is a curse.
That's not perfectionism, that simply a curse. Wasting time, effort and resources on something that is not in the scope of the project, even potentially introducing bugs with code that should not be there in the first place.
throw new NotImplementedException();
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: That's not perfectionism
That was my first thought.
However, I disagree that the developer has a curse. Nand32 has the curse ... his developer. 
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like someone who's been burned one time too many when PHBs declared a prototype to be exactly what they needed and insisted on taking it directly into production.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
This. Exactly!
Socialism is the Axe Body Spray of political ideologies: It never does what it claims to do, but people too young to know better keep buying it anyway. (Glenn Reynolds)
|
|
|
|
|
Nah! that never happens! 
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Bingo! My boss should read this. He exactly has this (sly) behaviour of trying to push a proto into production. But we push him back explaining why that wouldn't work.
But this developer who is doing this genuine proto is just crazy. lol 
|
|
|
|
|
Nand32 wrote: My boss should read this. He exactly has this (sly) behaviour of trying to push a proto into production
Tell the boss the prototype has a bug that can delete half of the data randomly, and nobody knows why, so while it's okay as a prototype, it cannot leave a test environment.
|
|
|
|
|
So true, this was the first thing which came to my mind as well since it has happened so frequently. The other alternative is when the customer sees the prototype and is frustrated that it isn't a fully functional program they can start using tomorrow. 
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Neely wrote: a prototype to be exactly what they needed and insisted on taking it directly into production.
Yes. If they can see it, it must be done!
And that colleague that implements more than is asked for? It kind of makes sense to do it if it's going directly from demo to production. 
Cheers,
Mike Fidler
"I intend to live forever - so far, so good." Steven Wright
"I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met." Also Steven Wright
"I'm addicted to placebos. I could quit, but it wouldn't matter." Steven Wright yet again.
|
|
|
|
|
REST operations aren't fancy, they're just operations.
Just slap him with some YAGNI and move on.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity."
- Hanlon's Razor
|
|
|
|
|
That's a very bad sign indeed. You are becomming a pointy haired boss and are beginning to sound like them. Have you been bitten by one? I would sprinkle you with holy water and garlic juice, but I am allergic myself to one of them.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems that most every time I have ever delivered a POC or mockup, even after explaining that 'these screens aren't wired yet', someone inevitably complains that they can't save their input.
I agree that its overkill for a proto, but hard to argue with someone doing more than required...just at the wrong time.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
If it is holding up the task at hand, that is a pretty easy argument to make.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: they can't save their input
I've had a design totally rejected because of this!
They wondered why I started steaming from my ears.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
once worked for a boss who would be a perfect match to your man,
this bosses concept of a POC was something that had *full functionality* to be "demonstrated on a subset/sample of the data."
Seriously, one project was: "OK team, we got a potential 5 - 6 month project to develop a package to do account consolidation using 'fuzzy logic account matching' on 60 million records from 3 different systems, we need a POC / demo system to do ALL of those things on a 6000 record sample for a meeting with them next week. We're flying in for the demo next Friday and by the way it has to be on their hardware because they can't release any data [privacy bullshit] even for testing."
I magnanimously offered myself for the role of preparing the powerpoint slides for that meeting. 
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
Lopatir wrote: I magnanimously offered myself for the role of preparing the powerpoint slides for that meeting
 
|
|
|
|
|
Lopatir wrote: they can't release any data [privacy bullshit] even for testing
Been there, done that so many, many times. We build commercial inkjet printing systems. I've lost track the number of times a customer has complained of a printing problem, we've asked them to send us their data, and one of two things happen. They either outright refuse, or they send us "pretend" data that was hacked together by hand. We're still supposed to fix their problem, though .
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
|
How about the other way around, when I use software (let's say - some popular IDE) that is sold in the millions, and the vendor is too cheap to invest in proper QA and automated tests?
Then, *every* *single* new minor version has some regression in it, and the vendor will not even look at a bug report that doesn't contain a whole bunch of logs and data that we cannot legally release to them.
Also, in many cases a company wants to protect their users' personal information. Legality and regulations aside, this is the ETHICAL thing to. Wouldn't *you* be happy to know that your PII is treated with respect and that access to it is shared with the minimum number of people?
Sure, it's frustrating to the vendor, and to the developers, and to me personally when I'm on the side that needs to fix bugs with limited information - but it is a fair price to pay for having an ecosystem that respects people's information and privacy.
|
|
|
|
|
obeobe wrote: an ecosystem that respects people's information and privacy
Occasionally that's the case, but most often it's far simpler. A number of our customers use our systems to print lottery tickets. Those folks almost never give us data, since they don't want us to print a winning ticket. The ones who print customized catalogs, account statements and the like won't share their data because they're worried about their competitors getting their customer list.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
