|
necrobobsledder posted:
exactly this. We had to onboard a new pair to one of our projects and this was exactly the process we used. We didn't even have a typo to fix, we just had one of them find a random h3 and make it an h4, and then had the other guy switch it back. The goal was to make sure they each had access to the repo, were able to pull it down, run it locally, make changes, and push them up to source control. After that we talked through the db schema and some of the weird business stuff the project has to work around, and that's pretty much it. However, I'm becoming less and less surprised by the amount of work people choose to do. Without management being somewhat technical, it's possible to do nothing for weeks at a time, especially if you don't have good version control practices. If you don't, it's not always apparent who hasn't made a commit in over a month. I don't advocate judging work on the frequency / amount of work checked in to source control, but it should be greater than zero.
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 04:40 |
|
|
As I mentioned before, I'm a Java dude in ad-tech and getting a lot of attention from lots of companies doing similar stuff (who have all agreed to look at my non-compete and let me know how they feel). That said, I feel like my biggest deficiency right now is in multithreading and the concurrent package as I haven't really done a lot there on our system, besides some features that required very basic async and working with pools. How do I brush up on this? With 3 years of experience on my resume, I feel like I'm behind here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
I am dealing with this exact situation and it's driving me nuts. It's so difficult to keep working for a place that blindly rewards incompetence and dishonesty. It's unsettling to hear this is more common than I thought.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
rt4 posted:
Holy moly
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
vonnegutt posted:I don't advocate judging work on the frequency / amount of work checked in to source control, but it should be greater than zero. Wherever you go, you'll usually find some source of numbers. Depending on your software, it might be resolved tickets, commits, lines committed, or something like that. I always try to make those things as high (or low) as possible so that I can point to them later if someone isn't already looking at them. At my current job, the main things that are visible are handled support requests and number of changes committed. Handling support requests within the SLA is a metric with a bonus attached to it, but I feel like it couldn't possibly be a bad thing to be at the top of the repository chart too. As a result, I've ended up refactoring and unit testing a bunch dumb poo poo that I might have chosen to ignore otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:You say that, and yet inability to not be a total rear end in a top hat is kind of my #1 priority when vetting potential teammates. You might be God's gift to the discipline of software development; if you can't get along with the rest of the team you'll still be a net drain on our ability to get poo poo done. I'm generally a fan of peer-based reviews rather than manager-direct report reviews (team reviews each other member they like, pick someone they like least or have had least interaction with). This removes some of the perceptions of employee favoritism by management and can improve employee-employer trust. But also, this kind of trust / respect graph shows management more clearly what the mismatch is of their perception of who's valued versus what the ground truth is (not to mention who the cornerstones are). When compared with some sentiment analysis and metrics on communications like who's CC'ed most and for good things and so forth, it's easy to tell who the star players on teams are quantitatively as well as which members are coasting along with as few contributions as possible.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:As I mentioned before, I'm a Java dude in ad-tech and getting a lot of attention from lots of companies doing similar stuff (who have all agreed to look at my non-compete and let me know how they feel). That said, I feel like my biggest deficiency right now is in multithreading and the concurrent package as I haven't really done a lot there on our system, besides some features that required very basic async and working with pools. How do I brush up on this? With 3 years of experience on my resume, I feel like I'm behind here. Java Concurrency in Practice (Goetz et al.) was a pretty good read, I thought anyway. But it is ten years old now, so it isn't up to date with some of the very latest changes in the concurrency space. So read it for a decent intro/overview and then hit the javadocs for the more recent bells and whistles I guess?  Anything added to get to a higher level of abstraction than "this is my Thread, there are many like it but this one is mine" is a good thing.If you want something a bit out of left field (as in, not shipped by Oracle) to fool around with in the concurrent space, Akka is worth a look.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:I think it depends a lot upon your environment. In a lot of big bureaucracies you can live with people that have no actual technical skills but are super nice, and that may actually be fine because there's hardly any productivity to speak of or anything actually being done... Okay, yeah, given the choice between "rear end in a top hat who can produce good product" and "nice person who is totally useless", I guess I'd take the rear end in a top hat. But I'd also start to seriously question my company / location at that point, because ideally I'd have more options. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
kitten smoothie posted:We're talking not even checking in a simple bug fix here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
volkadav posted:Java Concurrency in Practice (Goetz et al.) was a pretty good read, I thought anyway. But it is ten years old now, so it isn't up to date with some of the very latest changes in the concurrency space. So read it for a decent intro/overview and then hit the javadocs for the more recent bells and whistles I guess? I've dabbled in Akka. We use Play at work now. I'll check that book out but I don't have much time. I'm a bit worried about that realm since I've spent like my entire review time with CTCI/EPI type questions but we'll see. What kind of stuff would you even ask re: concurrency to someone with about three years of experience?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
Anyone interview with SpaceX recently? A recruiter just reached out to me, and hey, space. Sounds neat.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
Ithaqua posted:Anyone interview with SpaceX recently? A recruiter just reached out to me, and hey, space. Sounds neat. I haven't but I've heard that they tend to overwork their people, because, you know, space.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
Doctor w-rw-rw- posted:I haven't but I've heard that they tend to overwork their people, because, you know, space. Then again, having SpaceX on your resume may help for future employment prospects (which is why probably they overwork and underpay their people and get away with it).
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
I would think that if you're skilled enough to get into SpaceX then you're skilled enough to not need any resume help for future employment prospects.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:
Unless their resume specifically made a big deal about working with a concurrent system in some capacity, probably it wouldn't even come up. I might expect a junior engineer to know that threads exist, a mid-level to know to stay the hell away from them, and a senior/lead to know that if they're very careful they can leverage them (and safe ways to do so) if all else fails. YMMV though, interviewing is as much luck of the draw as it is actual competency, I sometimes think.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 05:29
|
|
|
volkadav posted:Unless their resume specifically made a big deal about working with a concurrent system in some capacity, probably it wouldn't even come up. I might expect a junior engineer to know that threads exist, a mid-level to know to stay the hell away from them, and a senior/lead to know that if they're very careful they can leverage them (and safe ways to do so) if all else fails. I would personally expect candidates to know a lot more than this about concurrency. At all levels. Granted, it would depend on the exact position and technologies required, but having a good grasp on concurrency is very important for a lot of work; at least most of the work I do (server dev)
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
I work on an SOA in 'da Cloud.' In interviews I ask a little bit about threading, mostly about resource starvation. If you look like you have that kinda exposure I will ask about actors or greenlets. I am more interested in talking about consistency, availability, queueing and idempotency though, just because of the relevance to what we spend most of our time thinking about on the job. Edit: To clarify, I ask more about distributed concurrency than threading in a single vm or service. Both are extremely important. sink fucked around with this message at 07:09 on Aug 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 06:34
|
|
|
I would expect everyone programming in 2016 anno Domini to be able to work with more than one core of a processor at a time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 12:29
|
|
|
oliveoil posted:I would think that if you're skilled enough to get into SpaceX then you're skilled enough to not need any resume help for future employment prospects. Having worked at SpaceX is proof that you're skilled enough to get in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 14:44
|
|
|
Ithaqua posted:Anyone interview with SpaceX recently? A recruiter just reached out to me, and hey, space. Sounds neat. I once got a recruiting email from SpaceX congratulating me on my impressive work at Google. I have never worked for Google.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
How do I tell someone (that is in charge of projects I'm on) that they are disgusting and that maybe they should wash their hands before using shared mobile devices? Or at least the same day. Wasn't sure if to post this here or in the coding horrors thread. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 15:27
|
|
|
leper khan posted:How do I tell someone (that is in charge of projects I'm on) that they are disgusting and that maybe they should wash their hands before using shared mobile devices? Or at least the same day. Passively agressively of course. Send an email to hr from a fake email account from the Starbucks down the street.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Six months without even a bug fix? How did they even make it that far? I just had a conversation with a guy I'm working with about how he's seen employees at our current client take weeks to get a build environment set up 
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
Ithaqua posted:Anyone interview with SpaceX recently? A recruiter just reached out to me, and hey, space. Sounds neat. The satellite industry is pretty neat too, check out Spire. Very interesting list of jobs on AngelList, startups in NYC and some other cities. Actually found a nice recruiter too: Single Sprout although all their jobs appear to be on AngelList.  Elysium Health is an actual company hiring.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
The head of recruitment at a company I was rly interested in said "How's Thursday at 3?" (10 minutes from now). He never confirmed or answered my follow-up. Is every recruiter loving inept as gently caress?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:The head of recruitment at a company I was rly interested in said "How's Thursday at 3?" (10 minutes from now). He never confirmed or answered my follow-up. Is every recruiter loving inept as gently caress? Pretty much, yeah.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Good Will Hrunting posted:Is every recruiter loving inept as gently caress? No. But the ones that aren't very quickly find better, less stressful and soul destroying jobs. My team's one good recruiter is now my team's TPM which is great for our organization's workflow but is murdering my incoming candidate quality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
The top 1% of recruiters tend to work for the top 1% of companies out there (and no, it doesn't mean that Google, MS, Amazon, etc. recruiters will be better actually). Also, they tend to be internal recruiters rather than external ones that are more like scalpers than anything else. Like any profession, judging a profession based upon average interactions will not give you a good impression of said profession. Whenever I feel bad that my professional life sucks and a really good recruiter said that he'd have found me something great, it really does make me feel better... then I  because my location is my #1 handicap that I struggle with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:my location is my #1 handicap that I struggle with. People here have thoughts about full-time remote work? I live in the southeastern US. Pay is subpar compared to the northeast or west coast, jobs are not plentiful, and my coworkers are (largely) unambitious fuckups who I can't really learn anything from. I've spent these 8 years of professional software development mainly cleaning up other peoples' messes. Am I mistaken to think that a remote job would probably be much better?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
I'm in the southeast US now after having been on the west coast. I'd generally recommend looking at remote work for a reputable Bay Area company at this point instead of entertaining local offers if you're pretty competitive. After looking around and talking to some recruiters, the pay is roughly on-par with mid-west pay, and most metro areas in the midwest are lower cost of living than Charlotte, NC and the Atlanta metro area, so you're in a bit of a squeeze compared to even flyover country engineers. Atlanta is a huge outsourcing area for tech as well and is not in the kind of technical talent pool as the DC area so the tech jobs tend to be lower tier than even there. Here's one problem I've hit with technical growth - there are almost no companies out there that are wiling to hire you onto a team as one of the weakest people where you would be best positioned to learn from everyone. Instead, if anything you'll be a deep expert at one thing and you'll broaden out among other experts at other topics. Otherwise, you're looking at huge software teams with tons of overlap and roughly similar background folks. Hence, I've been team lead and architect repeatedly mentoring people that have been around longer than me in software and IT since I've been 23, and I'm constantly having to train myself off the clock to the effect of working at least 100+ hours / week for my whole career. The 40 - 80 hours / week at work is a sinkhole of time is the ultimate problem, so you have to make up for it elsewhere. It was great when I could just sit down and code for a few hours / day without getting basic questions or having to troubleshoot someone else's bugs. The other thing about remote work is that you'll never be able to get above a certain rank / importance level in an organization. If you're working for a Bay Area HQed company while living in Thailand, you're not going to be VP of engineering or CTO full stop. If any of this progression is at all of interest to you, you'll need to relocate, look locally and accept globalization cost shifts, or start your own dang company.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
I'm constantly coming up with crazy ideas and building them on the weekend. Someday, I'll get rich from one of them...
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:It was great when I could just sit down and code for a few hours / day without getting basic questions or having to troubleshoot someone else's bugs. I would love to go back to that. It's even worse that I'm working remotely now. Just makes it an even bigger pain in the rear end to help out others.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 09:11
|
|
|
zerofunk posted:I would love to go back to that. It's even worse that I'm working remotely now. Just makes it an even bigger pain in the rear end to help out others. I work remotely and the biggest perk is that I don't have to deal with other people's stupid minor issues any more. But I also have the advantage of being in a timezone that makes it super inconvenient for anyone to ask me for help (+14 hrs relative to the rest of my team).
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 09:58
|
|
|
I'm in between two offices. One two hours ahead of me and the other five hours behind. The one that is two hours ahead is much less experienced and they generate most of the silly issues. And since the other two offices are seven hours apart, that means I deal with a lot of it by default. I probably do get bothered less by the other office than I would otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 10:15
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:The top 1% of recruiters tend to work for the top 1% of companies out there (and no, it doesn't mean that Google, MS, Amazon, etc. recruiters will be better actually). Mine is though 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
Ok so here's a curious thing: I'm still fresh enough to software engineering(I got here late) to just *love it*. I adore the work. But I'm currently at a (non-tech) Fortune 500 and while it's a really swell name to have on the resume - I'm beginning to see the reasonable probability that there's no true future in development here - I'll probably linger around getting largely underpaid for a while, and then will probably end up getting pressured into a management role and taken away from the tech. Along with that, I'm drastically undercompensated and under-recognized for the work I'm doing - today I learned we're losing one of our contractors to another team where they've been made a senior developer - despite the fact I've more or less been responsible for 50% of their productivity over the last year, by spending probably an hour or so per day coaching them on bare simple technical stuff, and/or 'working with them'(read: telling them what to do, step by painful step). Am I insane to start looking to flee from solid benefits and a low-demand job, just because the base salary isn't ideal and I'm bored out of my mind?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
Cuntpunch posted:Am I insane to start looking to flee from solid benefits and a low-demand job, just because the base salary isn't ideal and I'm bored out of my mind? No one can tell you what to do here. Job satisfaction is hugely important, as is being well-compensated. If you're underpaid and not happy with your job, then finding a job where you're happy and well-paid makes perfect sense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
If you trust your management/HR, then it wouldn't be unreasonable to talk to them and say "Hey look, I think I'm making big contributions to the team here and really making the company stronger, but I don't feel like I'm being valued or that I have a good career path in front of me." Smart companies will want to keep their good employees and are willing to work with you to find a setup that will work. Of course, the danger with doing this is that if your management/HR aren't trustworthy, they may pre-emptively fire you because they're worried you're looking to jump ship and they can't rely on you to be a good little peon. So it's a judgement call.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
Cuntpunch posted:Ok so here's a curious thing: I'm still fresh enough to software engineering(I got here late) to just *love it*. I adore the work. But I'm currently at a (non-tech) Fortune 500 and while it's a really swell name to have on the resume - I'm beginning to see the reasonable probability that there's no true future in development here - I'll probably linger around getting largely underpaid for a while, and then will probably end up getting pressured into a management role and taken away from the tech. Along with that, I'm drastically undercompensated and under-recognized for the work I'm doing - today I learned we're losing one of our contractors to another team where they've been made a senior developer - despite the fact I've more or less been responsible for 50% of their productivity over the last year, by spending probably an hour or so per day coaching them on bare simple technical stuff, and/or 'working with them'(read: telling them what to do, step by painful step). Send out your resume to some places and see how you feel if they reach out. You can always say no.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 04:40 |
|
|
Cuntpunch posted:Ok so here's a curious thing: I'm still fresh enough to software engineering(I got here late) to just *love it*. I adore the work. But I'm currently at a (non-tech) Fortune 500 and while it's a really swell name to have on the resume - I'm beginning to see the reasonable probability that there's no true future in development here - I'll probably linger around getting largely underpaid for a while, and then will probably end up getting pressured into a management role and taken away from the tech. Along with that, I'm drastically undercompensated and under-recognized for the work I'm doing - today I learned we're losing one of our contractors to another team where they've been made a senior developer - despite the fact I've more or less been responsible for 50% of their productivity over the last year, by spending probably an hour or so per day coaching them on bare simple technical stuff, and/or 'working with them'(read: telling them what to do, step by painful step). Only reason to be in that environment is absolute top pay. For anything less sever. On the remote front I find myself fenced in now too. I'm the Director of a large team in an office 5000 miles from the rest of the development teams and there's zero chance for growth now. Going to have to step out at some point.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 00:16
|
|