I kinda feel sorry for him

There should be a communist programming language.

- There are no classes.
- There is no inheritance.
- All code is executed simultaneously, since it's equal.
- All variables are global, since everything belongs to everyone
- There are no private functions
- Every function must have side effects, for the 'greater good'
- As soon as it is written, you no longer own the code
- Instead the code owns you
- And your machine

I slowly get why this thing didn't work out on society either.

🤣🤣🤣
Somehow, my boss got his son, 19, working in a team of developers last week.
Son: i got ton of money and i dont need to do this. i inherit lot of properties from my dad.(trying to sound funny, superior, and boasting of his inheritance knowledge he might have learned in school during java class probably.)

A guy in the team: No you dont. You are like us.😎😎😎
Son: minds his own business now.

Damn that line made my day.
🤗👏👏👏👏

++ for this dude for insulting morons like this at work.
I may have to remove it on boss request if he see it. But for now hit as many ++ to show that idiot no body likes people like him.

Let the student use their own laptops. Even buy them one instead of having computers on site that no one uses for coding but only for some multiple choice tests and to browse Facebook.

Teach them 10 finger typing. (Don't be too strict and allow for personal preferences.)

Teach them text navigation and editing shortcuts. They should be able to scroll per page, jump to the beginning or end of the line or jump word by word. (I am not talking vi bindings or emacs magic.) And no, key repeat is an antifeature.

Teach them VCS before their first group assignment. Let's be honest, VCS means git nowadays. Yet teach them git != GitHub.

Teach git through the command line. They are allowed to use a gui once they aren't afraid to resolve a merge conflict or to rebase their feature branch against master. Just committing and pushing is not enough.

Teach them test-driven development ASAP. You can even give them assignments with a codebase of failing tests and their job is to make them pass in the beginning. Later require them to write tests themselves.

Don't teach the language, teach concepts. (No, if else and for loops aren't concepts you god-damn amateur! That's just syntax!)

When teaching object oriented programming, I'd smack you if do inane examples with vehicles, cars, bikes and a Mercedes Benz. Or animal, cat and dog for that matter. (I came from a self-taught imperative background. Those examples obfuscate more than they help.) Also, inheritance is overrated in oop teachings.

Functional programming concepts should be taught earlier as its concepts of avoiding side effects and pure functions can benefit even oop code bases. (Also great way to introduce testing, as pure functions take certain inputs and produce one output.)

Focus on one language in the beginning, it need not be Java, but don't confuse students with Java, Python and Ruby in their first year. (Bonus point if the language supports both oop and functional programming.)

And for the love of gawd: let them have a strictly typed language. Why would you teach with JavaScript!?

Use industry standards. Notepad, atom and eclipse might be open source and free; yet JetBrains community editions still best them.

For grades, don't your dare demand for them to write code on paper. (Pseudocode is fine.)

Don't let your students play compiler in their heads. It's not their job to know exactly what exception will be thrown by your contrived example. That's the compilers job to complain about. Rather teach them how to find solutions to these errors.

Teach them advanced google searches.

Teach them how to write a issue for a library on GitHub and similar sites.

Teach them how to ask a good stackoverflow question :>

I'm coming off a lengthy staff augmentation assignment awful enough that I feel like I need to be rehabilitated to convince myself that I even want to be a software developer.

They needed someone who does .NET. It turns out what they meant was someone to copy and paste massive amounts of code that their EA calls a "framework." Just copy and paste this entire repo, make a whole ton of tweaks that for whatever reason never make their way back into the "template," and then make a few edits for some specific functionality. And then repeat. And repeat. Over a dozen times.

The code is unbelievable. Everything is stacked into giant classes that inherit from each other. There's no dependency inversion. The classes have default constructors with a comment "for unit testing" and then the "real" code uses a different one.

It's full of projects, classes, and methods with weird names that don't do anything. The class and method names sound like they mean something but don't. So after a dozen times I tried to refactor, and the EA threw a hissy fit. Deleting dead code, reducing three levels of inheritance to a simple class, and renaming stuff to indicate what it does are all violations of "standards." I had to go back to the template and start over.

This guy actually recorded a video of himself giving developers instructions on how to copy and paste his awful code.

Then he randomly invents new "standards." A class that reads messages from a queue and processes them shouldn't process them anymore. It should read them and put them in another queue, and then we add more complication by reading from that queue. The reason? We might want to use the original queue for something else one day. I'm pretty sure rewriting working code to meet requirements no one has is as close as you can get to the opposite of Agile.

I fixed some major bugs during my refactor, and missed one the second time after I started over. So stuff actually broke in production because I took points off the board and "fixed" what worked to add back in dead code, variables that aren't used, etc.

In the process, I asked the EA how he wanted me to do this stuff, because I know that he makes up "standards" on the fly and whatever I do may or may not be what he was imagining. We had a tight deadline and I didn't really have time to guess, read his mind, get it wrong, and start over. So we scheduled an hour for him to show me what he wanted.

He said it would take fifteen minutes. He used the first fifteen insisting that he would not explain what he wanted, and besides he didn't remember how all of the code he wrote worked anyway so I would just have to spend more time studying his masterpiece and stepping through it in the debugger.

Being accountable to my team, I insisted that we needed to spend the scheduled hour on him actually explaining what he wanted. He started yelling and hung up. I had to explain to management that I could figure out how to make his "framework" work, but it would take longer and there was no guarantee that when it was done it would magically converge on whatever he was imagining. We totally blew that deadline.

When the .NET work was done, I got sucked into another part of the same project where they were writing massive 500 line SQL stored procedures that no one could understand. They would write a dozen before sending any to QA, then find out that there was a scenario or two not accounted for, and rewrite them all. And repeat. And repeat. Eventually it consisted of, one again, copying and pasting existing procedures into new ones.

At one point one dev asked me to help him test his procedure. I said sure, tell me the scenarios for which I needed to test. He didn't know. My question was the equivalent of asking, "Tell me what you think your code does," and he couldn't answer it. If the guy who wrote it doesn't know what it does right after he wrote it and you certainly can't tell by reading it, and there's dozens of these procedures, all the same but slightly different, how is anyone ever going to read them in a month or a year? What happens when someone needs to change them? What happens when someone finds another defect, and there are going to be a ton of them?

It's a nightmare. Why interview me with all sorts of questions about my dev skills if the plan is to have me copy and paste stuff and carefully avoid applying anything that I know?

The people are all nice except for their evil XEB (Xenophobe Expert Beginner) EA who has no business writing a line of code, ever, and certainly shouldn't be reviewing it.

I've tried to keep my sanity by answering stackoverflow questions once in a while and sometimes turning evil things I was forced to do into constructive blog posts to which I cannot link to preserve my anonymity. I feel like I've taken a six-month detour from software development to shovel crap. Never again. Lesson learned. Next time they're not interviewing me. I'm interviewing them. I'm a professional.

Got a CTO at my Unity job that's younger than me, which by itself is fine, but the only reason this guy was put into that position was because the previous CTO left the company at the time where I was relatively new and he is the person most familiar with the codebase of our primary project than I was at the time.

I understood the decision at the time, but still, having a position of power being handed to them just as a matter of inheritance doesn't command my respect. Nevertheless, I withheld my judgement at the time to see how his leadership goes.

Not even 1 year in and this young CTO started making jabs at me, calling my code hard to read and incomprehensible, to my face, in front of everybody else.

Motherfucker, I don't find his code easy to read either but I went out of my way to frequently ask him, the previous CTO and other teammates to clarify what they wrote here and there. He on the other, made no attempt to ask me for clarification and instead waited until company meetings to air these grievances.

Our boss started to ask me to follow SOLID principles (even though he can't recite what that acronym means) due to complaint from the CTO guy, even though the CTO guy doesn't even follow SOLID himself! But I took the higher road and didn't flip it right back on him.

What I did propose in return though, is that the dev team start using pull requests and have a code review process if the CTO wants to sign off on everything that gets in the codebase. Sounds reasonable enough, right? Not for this guy! He immediately starts complaining that reviewing pull requests would be more work for him. Motherfucker, you refused to go to my table to ask for clarifications about my code yet still want to understand what goes on, then do code review.

It was at this point that I realized that this guy doesn't actually want me to write good, clear code. He wants me to write code HIS way so that he can understand. Yeah okay, I can accept that idea in isolation. Some open-source projects require contributors to follow certain coding convention to make the maintainers' job easier too. One project that immediately came to mind is "In-game Debug Console for Unity 3D" (disclosure: I am a contributor to this project)

But guess what?

THIS COMPANY DOESN'T HAVE A FREAKING CODING CONVENTION. NOT WRITTEN DOWN ANYWHERE. NOT EVEN A VOCAL ONE.

What this CTO guy wants from me is a complete blackbox.

To all fellow devs out there, I hope you don't work with a CTO like this, or become one.

> Last year wrote a unittest - I was asked to delete it
> no design patterns. Not a single one
> no encapsulation
> fucked up inheritance [I had no idea it was possible at all...]
> generics every-fucking-where
> I could go on...

this month the lead dev was not in and I had to make a new feature. Guess what I did :)

tdd [coverage >90%], a couple of builders, a factory or two, two composites, one decorator, only a few generics - only where really needed. Private fields, not a single @Autowired field [they were fucking my tdd], nicely abstracted integrations, and so on. Everything is writen according to clean code: max 10loc methods, <140col lines, reusable constants and utils, SOLID as a rock, etc.

Due date is next week. Took me 3 weeks to craft it.

Guess who's gonna be piiiiiiiiiiiiisssedd 😁

the best part - I don't even work there, our company was hired for xx hours as helping hands 😁

that's not all. They have like 6 envs and their deployment is all-fucking-manual. Will try to learn how to dockerize that app and deploy it on docker. Gosh I wish I could see his face when he's back 😁

p.S. From ethical point of view, he's the only dev who believes his code is perfect. No other dev in the team agrees. AND he once said: 'it's gonna be my way or no way at all'. So I don't think I did wrong... Did I? :)

I just started a job as a junior C# dev.
My project at work includes:
-no coding style
-multiple classes in one file
-all classes are static
-who needs interfaces?
-typos in variable names
-more than 3 levels of inheritance
-conf files such as "blabla.xml"
-comments? documentation? nope
-copy&paste everywhere

Client outsourced this project to us to get the job done properly :D

Looks that I have some opportunity to show my talent.

So, company I work at, is on desperate need of PHP developers, who can work in WordPress and Magneto. Company announced vacancy.

Only 20 CVs were dropped 4 days before from today. So company called all of them for interview and I was one of the interviewer. Most of applicants told me that they know Laravel but not WordPress.

I was like fine. Maybe they can work on WordPress too. But I was wrong. Here are some funny interviews:

Me: how many types of inheritance does PHP support?
Applicant 1: 7. Single, multiple, etc..

Me: Do you know difference between interface and abstract class?
Applicant 2: (he just said some gibberish)

Me: why do u prefer Laravel to WordPress?
Applicant 3: because by default Laravel support payment gateway, so we can create e commerce application faster. WordPress doesn't support payment gateway.

Me: how many WordPress site you have worked on?
Applicant 4: I have 4 themes in WordPress.org
Me: Do you create all of them by yourself?
Applicant 4: Yes
Me: Do u know difference between require and include?
Applicant 4: No
Me: Do u know difference between query_posts and WP_Query?
Applicant 4: No
Me: (facepalm)

👦🏻 : Have you heard about the object-oriented way to become wealthy?
👧🏻 : No 🤔
👦🏻 : Inheritance

How many times do I have explain the rookiees in java developer team, that implementing an interface is not inheritance. You are not actually inheriting any member - variable or method or otherwise. You are just getting a skeleton, according to which you have write your class. THAT IS NOT INHERITANCE.

So MULTIPLE INHERITANCE does not exist in java. Period.

There is no way around it. Stop misunderstanding stuff and passing that misconceptions to newbies.

- Have you heard of the object oriented way to get wealthy?
- No...
- "Inheritance"

Colleagues cannot seem to grasp that allowing a user to manually update a field via an Api, that only business process should update is a bad idea.

The entire team of around 10 'software developers' cannot grasp that just because the frontend website won't set it doesn't mean its secure. I have tried many times now...

Just an example honestly... Our project follows a concrete repository pattern using no interfaces or inheritance, returning anaemic domain models (they are just poco) that then get mapped into 'view models' (its an api). The domain models exist to map to 'view models' and have no methods on them. This is in response to my comments over the last 2 years about returning database models as domain transfer objects and blindly trusting all Posts of those models being a bad idea due to virtual fields in Ef.

Every comment on a pull request triggers hours of conversation about why we should make a change vs its already done so just leave it. Even if its a 5 minute change.

After 2 years the entire team still can't grasp restful design, or what the point is.

Just a tiny selection of constant incompetence that over the years has slowly warn me down to not really caring.

I can't really understand anymore if this is normal.

Yesterday I had a phone screening with a hiring manager and was expected to talk about more of my expertise and just my experience overall. With four years of experience, I thought I could tell her everything she needed to know.

However, this interview was just kind of... weird. Literally every question she asked was defintiions. It was as if I was doing a short answer quiz.

"What is object-oriented programming?"
"What is a hashmap versus a list?"
"What is class inheritance?"

Like... What the fuck. These are questions that give no insight into who I am or how I work. This is shit you see on a second-year midterm exam. What a waste of time.

CoWorker: “Yea then just use double inheritance to grab the methods off the two classes.”

Me: “Yea that doesn’t seem right... the first object is a string parser the second object predicts future occurrences...”

CoWorker: [louder] “No trust me, I’m taking a developer course right now. If you inherit both classes your new class can use all the needed methods!”

Me: “Okay, go for it bro.”

So tired of people who think they know what they’re doing...

Oriented Object design class today, introducing inheritance with squares-rectangles and circles-ellipses.

No don't do that.

It's the worst example ever. It does not work. Just no, stop

FUCK

I really wanna love Rust. I really, really do. But no inheritance is just such a stupid decision. But inheritence bad REEEE. No. Just no. Composition only works fine for some things because it just isn't powerful enough to properly (without performance penalty or boilerplate, that is) emulate inheritance. Some things are just better with inheritance: Games, UI, html or xml libs, etc. Now I have to use stupid fucking workarounds because oh no we cannot implement inheritance because that's scary and might give the programmers to much power. I can decide when I want to use inheritance or composition for myself, dickheads

The source engine is interesting, because it has reached that stage of life where it's old enough to be remarkable-- in the sense that it could be called 'legacy', a sort of milestone in development practices and thinking, both in software, and design.

That said, a better look at it might be from the lense of *uses today*.

A lot of former source engine (SE) devs are now going to unity or unreal, I don't blame them.
But it's interesting to examine examples of games that haven't.

One such game is the freeware "No More Room In Hell". A couple online play throughs shows a wealth of well designed maps (and an even greater horde of shovelware maps, but hey, you take the good with the bad).

The age of the engine itself shows. Even in games like Left 4 Dead the engine's age can be seen. This, in some respects has been a drag, but also a blessing. Where other games could rely on their effects, shaders, and other tech, modders, map makers, and designers have had to rely on wit and creativity.

Enter "situated environments."

In an age where many people desire to travel, to go places, and have grown up doing the exact OPPOSITE, there is a great desire for variety of locations in games: not merely 'environmental' in the shallow sense of a 'theme' such as 'lava', 'tundra', etc. But in the sense of setting in general.

We want places that are both out of reach and yet familiar. Fire-fights happen in city streets. Apocalypses happen in neighborhoods where the skyline is both broken and at once something we know by sight. Open air markets, grocery stores, neighborhoods, all of these provide the back drops of popular games and series such as COD, Battlefield, The Last of Us, and yes, the example game, NMRIH.

I call this idea of 'familiar but out-of-reach level design', "situated environments", because familiarity with them, but *lack of real life experience* with them, on a day to day basis, allows people's expectations to fill in the gaps.

No one for example would argue the layouts of 7 Days To Die are familiar, but most of us don't spend all day in a junkyard or a high rise hotel.
So they *feel* familiar. Likewise with Skyrim, the villages and towns, both iconic and strange, our expectations formed by cultural inheritance, hollywood films, television shows, stories, childrens books, and yes, other games.

In a way, familiarity-without-real-in-person-experience is a shortcut for designers, one that lets them play with the player's head-space, the players subconscious idea of how a space and setting *should* work, what to *expect* out of the area, how to *operate* within the area. And the more it conforms to expectations, the more surprising an overdesigned element appears to be, rather than immersion breaking. A real life example of this is people's idea of chernobyl. When they discover the amusement park and ferris wheel they're blown away by the juxtaposition of the wasteland that surrounds them and the associations ('nostalgia' as it were) that such a carnival ride carries for many of us. It simultaneously *doesn't belong* and is yet all at once *perfectly situated in the environment*.

It is to say 'surreal', which is adjacent to the idea of *being real*, in terms of our "perception of what is and isn't plausible, if not possible."

This is at the heart of suspension of disbelief, because in essence, virtual worlds are a lie, like fiction, and good fiction violates expectations in order to tell us truths about reality. As part of our ability to differentiate bullshit from reality, there is to say an element in our bullshit detectors (doubtless evolved over many 10's of thousands of years), that is designed to not merely detect what is absurd in our limited experience, but to incorporate absurdity into everyday experience. In that sense part of our rationality is the acceptance of irrational experiences, learning from it, and discovering 'a proper place for each thing' in the "models of the world" we all carry around in our heads. Eventually we normalize the absurd, it becomes the new reality, and what remains unassimilated becomes superstition (real or otherwise), a figment, or an anomaly.

One of the best examples I've encountered is The Last of Us: Left Behind, a good chunk of which is spent in a mall. And they nailed the environment perfectly I would say.

Or for those who don't own a PS4, a more accessible example is a map in NMRIH aptly called "the museum", and few words better do it justice than to go play it yourself--that is, if you really want to know what I mean by a 'situated environment'.

What better way, during this pandemic, to get out of the news cycle and into your own head? Sometimes the best way to escape isn't outside, it's within.

Rust is a beautiful language. Fast, safe and system level.

The best and worst part of the language is that it has no inheritance.

Oh, and the super slow compile times really do suck.

For some reason I keep over engineering stuff to the point I spend 2 hours thinking the best way to do something. I'm making the backend for a project of mine and I wanted somewhat decent error handling and useful error responses. I won't go into detail here but let's say that in any other (oo) language it would be a no-brainer to do this with OOP inheritance, but Rust does OOP by composition (and there's no way to upcast traits and downcasting is hard). I ended up wasting so much time thinking of how to do something generic enough, easily extendable and that doesn't involve any boilerplate or repeated code with no success. What I didn't realize is that my API will not be public (in the sense that the API is not the service I offer), I'm the only one who needs to figure out why I got a 400 or a 403. There's no need to return a response stating exactly which field had a wrong value or exactly what resource had it's access denied to the user. I can just look at the error code, my documentation and the request I made to infer what caused the error. If that does not work I can always take a quick look at the source code of the server to see what went wrong. So In short I ended up thrashing all the refactoring I had done and stayed with my current solution for error-handling. I have found a few places that could use some improvement, but it's nothing compared to the whole revamp I was doing of the whole thing.

This is not the first time I over engineer stuff (and probably won't be the last). I think I do it in order to be future-proof. I make my code generic enough so in case any requirements change in the future I don't have to rewrite everything, but that adds no real value to my stuff since I'm always working solo, the projects aren't super big and a rewrite wouldn't take too long. In the end I just end up wasting time, sanity and keystrokes on stuff that will just slow down my development speed further down the road without generating any benefits.

Why am I like this? Oh well, I'm just glad I figured out this wasn't necessary before putting many hours of work into it.

So I'm currently "assigned" a task in which I need to fix a slow query problem, which isn't a big deal. The biggest problem is that the original team of this project haven't got any means to develop things on your local machine. Looking at their docs and scripts, it seems like everything is deployed to a dev server. But whilst looking for details for this server, I found out that the network team have decommissioned the server!

So my dilemma right now is that I can't test any of my fixes on anywhere besides staging, or possibly production! Inheriting projects is the bloody worst!

So I figure since I straight up don't care about the Ada community anymore, and my programming focus is languages and language tooling, I'd rant a bit about some stupid things the language did. Necessary disclaimer though, I still really like the language, I just take issue with defense of things that are straight up bad. Just admit at the time it was good, but in hindsight it wasn't. That's okay.

For the many of you unfamiliar, Ada is a high security / mission critical focused language designed in the 80's. So you'd expect it to be pretty damn resilient.

Inheritance is implemented through "tagged records" rather than contained in classes, but dispatching basically works as you'd expect. Only problem is, there's no sealing of these types. So you, always, have to design everything with the assumption that someone can inherit from your type and manipulate it. There's also limited accessibility modifiers and it's not granular, so if you inherit from the type you have access to _everything_ as if they were all protected/friend.

Switch/case statements are only checked that all valid values are handled. Read that carefully. All _valid_ values are handled. You don't need a "default" (what Ada calls "when others" ). Unchecked conversions, view overlays, deserialization, and more can introduce invalid values. The default case is meant to handle this, but Ada just goes "nah you're good bro, you handled everything you said would be passed to me".

Like I alluded to earlier, there's limited accessibility modifiers. It uses sections, which is fine, but not my preference. But it also only has three options and it's bizarre. One is publicly in the specification, just like "public" normally. One is in the "private" part of the specification, but this is actually just "protected/friend". And one is in the implementation, which is the actual" private". Now Ada doesn't use classes, so the accessibility blocks are in the package (namespace). So guess what? Everything in your type has exactly the same visibility! Better hope people don't modify things you wanted to keep hidden.

That brings me to another bad decision. There is no "read-only" protection. Granted this is only a compiler check and can be bypassed, but it still helps prevent a lot of errors. There is const and it works well, better than in most languages I feel. But if you want a field within a record to not be changeable? Yeah too bad.

And if you think properties could fix this? Yeah no. Transparent functions that do validation on superficial fields? Nah.

The community loves to praise the language for being highly resilient and "for serious engineers", but oh my god. These are awful decisions.

Now again there's a lot of reasons why I still like the language, but holy shit does it scare me when I see things like an auto maker switching over to it.

The leading Ada compiler is literally the buggiest compiler I've ever used in my life. The leading Ada IDE is literally the buggiest IDE I've ever used in my life. And they are written in Ada.

Side note: good resilient systems are a byproduct of knowledge, diligence, and discipline, not the tool you used.

Client be like:
Pls, could you give the new Postgres user the same perms as this one other user?

Me:
Uh... Sure.

Then I find out that, for whatever reason, all of their user accounts have disabled inheritance... So, wtf.

Postgres doesn't really allow you to *copy* perms of a role A to role B. You can only grant role A to role B, but for the perms of A to carry over, B has to have inheritance allowed... Which... It doesn't.

So... After a bit of manual GRANT bla ON DATABASE foo TO user, I ping back that it is done and breath a sigh of relief.

Oooooonly... They ping back like -- Could you also copy the perms of A on all the existing objects in the schema to B???

Ugh. More work. Lets see... List all permissions in a schema and... Holy shit! That's thousands of tables and sequences, how tf am I ever gonna copy over all that???

Maybe I could... Disable the pager of psql, and pipe the list into a file, parse it by the magic of regex... And somehow generate a fuckload of GRANT statements? Uuuugh, but that'd kill so much time. Not to mention I'd need to find out what the individual permission letters in the output mean... And... Ugh, ye, no, too much work. Lets see if SO knows a solution!

And, surprise surprise, it did! The easiest, simplest to understand way, was to make a schema-only dump of the database, grep it for user A, substitute their name with B, and then input it back.

What I didn't expect is for the resulting filtered and altered grant list to be over 6800 LINES LONG. WHAT THE FUCK.

...And, shortly after I apply the insane number of grants... I get another ping. Turns out the customer's already figured out a way to grant all the necessary perms themselves, and I... No longer have to do anything :|

Joy. Utter, indescribable joy.

Is there any actual security reason for disabling inheritance in Postgres? (14.x) I'd think that if an account got compromised, it doesn't matter if it has the perms inherited or not, cuz you can just SET ROLE yourself to the granted role with the actual perms and go ham...

!rant

I think I'm at the final stage of grief where I want to destroy the entire human population . Economy , money and other factors like alcohol ... we as humans don't deserve to live . Controlling population growth with addiction is just messed up .

Even though the alcohol killed my dad , he was a really good person who was under such amounts of pressure that no-one deserves . Actually strike that everyone deserves much more . A tenant who occupied our property just as we needed to sell it for cash problems . His father stole his inheritance left behind by his mother . And relatives who didn't give a shot about him until he makes a trip to the hospital . An economy that's responsible for all this .

I want to rewrite this disgraceful race .

I must assume that whoever designed jinja2 was either on crack, or hadn’t used template systems before. This thing is too fucking complicated, and doesn’t make sense. From their docs:

“Jinja2 supports dynamic inheritance and does not distinguish between parent and child template as long as no extends tag is visited. While this leads to the surprising behavior that everything before the first extends tag including whitespace is printed out instead of being ignored, it can be used for a neat trick.”

My response: “I don’t give a fuck!! I need this fucking website to be fucking done already! I pass data into a fucking template engine, and the engine applies my fucking markdown!! This is bullshit!! Why am I still trying to understand your fucking nonsense?!? AGGJCDJVFD&@!?&@$?)@&!SHHHVBSHK!!!!!!”
*desk flip*

Fuck you to hell you jinja fucker

Can somebody explain to me why developers (especially web) have to micromanage every single thing into it's own f*ing component.

Story time: I have an input form with some tabs. I discovered that the UI Library (Devextreme) has a nice little component that handles forms, (including tabs, groups, etc.). So I make a page, configure tabs, inputs and whatnot.

Now, I already knew that my coworkers can't handle html that is bigger than a page. So instead of putting the configs in the frontend, I made nice files where I store those, to keep them nicely clean and seperated.

Me feeling very good, went off to have a nice lunch break.

I come back read the message from my coworker, asking me to make every tab it's own component and form and load them into a separate Tab-Component, instead of using the built in configuration

......

WHAT?

Like seriously. I have a f*ing library that handles that, why the f*ck do I need to reinvent the wheel here!?

Supposedly it's to make it more maintainable, easier to find bugs, flatten the hierarchy.

Here's a little wake up call you morons: Nesting hundreds of components into each other does *not* help you with that.
It just creates a rabbit-hole of confusing containers that you have to navigate and dissect every time you try to find something.

"Can I fix the bug in the detail Page? Sure I'll tell you tomorrow when I find out which fucking component the bug results from".

Components are there to be *reused*. It's using inheritance for reusing code all over again, but worse.

But maybe I'm just old fashioned, and conservative. Maybe I'm just a really bad software engineer, because nowadays everything seems to result in architectures spreading hundreds of folders, thousands of files with nothing but arbitrary cut-offs with no real benefit, that I don't see the value in.

our automated email system is written in 3 y/o razor (cshtml) pages that have no inheritance.

there's 50 files that are all copy/paste with slight variation in the strings.

I have to set up localization for all of it.

might just quit.

Since I sort of started web development seriously about two years and a little bit I’ve decided to raise the bar and intentionally lie in my resume to hopefully find a job that can help me to sustain my wife who is sick and my newborn son. I changed my experience to +3 years and out some “ghost” projects. No offers. Then, I put 5 years and tweaked projects and experience here and there. Again...nothing, nada, no offers. Should I just go all above and put 10 years and experience such as Microsoft and big 500 companies? I mean I hate to do this but I feel like I’m in a hole than I can’t get out while I’m gaining more and more knowledge every single day. I’m learning a lot about JavaScript which is my fav language as well as React. Authentication/Authorization and it’s different hierarchies/ inheritance methodologies as well as single and multi sign on methods applied to scalable web apps. I just what would be the outcome after lying so big. I hate lying but what’s so wrong with the market that I can’t find a job? Hold your fire and put in my shoes before ranting me. I don’t give this advice to anyone it’s just my experience looking for a job and my actual situation. ( currently working as IT Help Desk Level II)

<rant> Why is Apiary's editor so weak? It has no support for navigating from request to its code, it hides inheritance (so in the end you end up navigating source code via ctrl+f which is very cumbersome) and is buggy as hell. It randomly scrolls around, after awhile is laggy, syntax highlighting often breaks on a blank line with few spaces and so on... I wish so hard it would have had a plugin for IntelliJ IDEA with proper navigation and request preview. The web "editor" is just so clunky and generally bad :(.</rant>

What should I do, I have a central function that is not documentated and no test-cases are written for it. I have no clue what the method should really do, I know that it works in 99.9% of all cases otherwise we had much more bugs. Now there is one Unit-Test that reports an issue. I tracked it down to this method, no one touched the method nor the unit-test.
My logical thinking says that there is one statement missing, but it could also fuck up another part of the code... (This project has a bad testing coverage :'( )

What would you do?

- copy paste the method for this special case (I would hate me so much for breaking DRY)
- inheritance?! (Would make it more complex and then it would be still untested / undocumented)
- YOLO changing oO?! (hope for luck, just joking)

P.s it's an edge case unit test, the client / customer probably wouldn't realised it if it happens