S.P.A.Z. On the Fediverse

2019/03/05 10:28:05 PM UTC

I say this as a design dude that became a developer because I got tired of developer's telling me what could and couldn't be done.

In my career, I can honestly say 90% of devs make shit overly complicated so they can impress other devs.

It's the 21st century, homie. Things should be getting _easier_ to use, not harder.

True there is something to be said about learning about programming to help bridge that gap, but as devs, we gotta meet them more than halfway.

Because we know how.

2019/03/05 10:32:37 PM UTC

There is a fluidity to great design that when it is done well, it disappears. The greatest design is invisible.

This is the same ethos I would like to see applied to development and programming. Of course, there isn't going to be a one to one translation, but good development should be easily digestible, not a marathon of unraveling some random insufferable person's theories.

I'm often disappointed with devs because so many are invested in keeping it a mystery.

And that's some bullshit.

2019/03/05 10:41:06 PM UTC

One of the things I am proud of is that I consistently hear how easy my code is to follow and pick up. I value that feedback from my peers.

On the flip, it's interesting how I've actually gotten push back from others 'critiquing' my coding saying it is 'too simple', which generally reveals to me the mindset of a shop. A lot of folks, A LOT, get off by making overly complicated code.

In my estimation, this one of the biggest reasons that keeps programming from being as accessible as it should

2019/03/06 2:53:37 AM UTC

@Are0h This is the #1 metric I use when interviewing someone. I've also been told that it's the main reason the go language was designed the way it was (to make it hard/impossible for people to write hard-to-read code).

2019/03/05 10:29:26 PM UTC

@Are0h Also: i thought the whole "doing the impossible" was what gave developers of yesteryear a giant hard-on.

Or is it only impossible for US?

2019/03/05 10:35:49 PM UTC

@somarasu On the real, I think that was pushed by dudes to push women out of it.

The attachment men especially have in the tech game to creating indecipherable code is absurd. While I will admit the barrier to entry has been lowered over the years, it's still a fist fight to get developers to put a priority on simplicity rather than purposefully building in complexity as a show of 'superior' skill.

It just should be easier.

2019/03/05 11:12:22 PM UTC

@Are0h That's a great source of pride! Write code that looks like anyone could write it, and anyone will be able to read and enjoy.

Someone was just explaining the logic to me that simpler code is easier to debug, anyway. I already thought people should keep it clear and straightforward, but I haven't gotten far enough into writing my own to have made the connection that it's a bad move on its face. So really the only justification to make code flashy is... to feel superior? :flan_think:

2019/03/05 11:14:51 PM UTC

@pamela There are some times that really require some complex thinking, so not across the board.

But most of us aren't building proprietary enterprise level solutions that require this kind of work.

So I'd say either superiority or to hide the fact one just doesn't know what they're doing.

2019/03/06 12:43:16 AM UTC

The enterprise level solutions are the ones that need simply and easy to read code the most. These projects last a long time and you have many developers working on the same code.

But just as you said there are cases where code has to be complex. I think the key word here is that it needs to be as simple as possible but no simpler, to paraphrase Einstein who I believe said it first.

2019/03/06 12:49:28 AM UTC

@loke To a certain extent this is true, but when you're building something specific that there aren't readily available solutions for, you have to figure it out. And that process isn't always sexy.

Ideally, you'll get to that point with enough effort, but you can't really solve problems until you know they are problems, so it takes time to figure that out.


2019/03/06 8:12:48 AM UTC

@Are0h I recently learned from a friend there's a start-up culture that divides co-workers into two categories: "good" developers and "bad" developers. Such toxic nonsense.

I've gotten used to the mindset that complexity is the enemy and my code will be ugly and have bugs no matter how hard I try and I'm always happy when others locate issues in my code. I wouldn't wanna work with people telling me I was a bad developer for making mistakes. Glad I don't have to work for start-ups!

2019/03/06 2:02:19 PM UTC

@stsp Honestly, I don't like working for start-ups. They promise all of these grand ideas and outcomes, but more often than not just result in one being overworked in the extreme and underpaid.

It's a culture that pits people against each other in terms of who is willing to be exploited the most to the the 'best'.

Toxic is a great word for it. They are just not healthy places and they rarely turn out good work.

2019/03/06 2:14:40 PM UTC

@bamfic I haven't paid much attention to Go, so I didn't know this. That's pretty damning.

2019/03/06 2:16:04 PM UTC

@m455b Never feel bad if you don't. I've found just asking works.

And if a dev gets upset because you can't figure it out yourself, that says more about the dev that wrote it than you.

2019/03/06 2:21:57 PM UTC

@m455b No worries. There are lot of behaviors that are completely counter-productive that have just become accepted.

And this is the heart of the reason why we keep turning out shitty platforms.

2019/03/06 5:03:12 PM UTC

@pamela @Are0h this. it's a dick-measuring context, with brains as a proxy. who is the smartest fucker in the room? me! me! me! not intentionally excluding women, and people of color, but certainly a major side effect