Returning and finding everything done is equally suspicious. That's when you have to take a closer look and discover what spaghetti made it through peer review.

[–] Sebbe@lemmy.sebbem.se 64 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Or worse, it means you're not as good as you thought you were.

[–] RadicalEagle@lemmy.world 34 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's not so bad being the worst player on the team. Just means you have a lot of room for improvement as long as you're willing to learn. Honestly it's one of my favorite situations to find myself in. "Oh I suck. How can I get better?"

[–] cheddar@programming.dev 28 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Sounds good unless you really suck and there is no way for you to improve. I might or might not be speaking from experience.

[–] aStonedSanta@lemm.ee 11 points 3 months ago

I’m having that same imposter syndrome feeling right now. But one of the SMEs at work today randomly complained to me about another agent and his lack of caring/learning and thanked me for how I am. So. Sometimes it works out well as long as you’ll listen and learn. You can always learn more it just takes time.

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 4 points 3 months ago

In most crafts, and I consider software development one, there's rarely no way to improve. The problem arises if the client or the employer wants you to improve too quick, faster than you could, and sometimes faster than even possible.

But to be fair, sometimes developer doesn't want to improve either

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 3 points 3 months ago

Imposter Syndrome, I choose you!!

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 32 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Also, all the automated tests were commented out.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 26 points 3 months ago

Checking the ci logs for the past week, like:

86 test suites passed successfully
    ❌ 0 failures
    ✅ 0 success
    🤷‍♂️ 1785 skipped

[–] TheSlad@sh.itjust.works 21 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Ive heard of stories where people would have an imposed test coverage percentage requirement... and they would just have a single dummy method that printed "." to the console thousands of times. They then have a single test for that one method, and whenever their codebase grows to big, they add more lines to it so that the dummy method has enough lines to meet the test coverage requirement.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Percentage of lines covered by tests is such a terrible metric.

[–] TheSlad@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

All metrics are terrible when used for anything other than objective analysis

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, every metric that can be applied automatically ends up becoming useless if people are incentivized to break it

[–] Fontasia@feddit.nl 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Relevant xkcd

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 1 points 3 months ago

There's always one. Thanks for finding it ❤️