> My point is that I rarely don't regret (for my careers sake) jumping in and delivering (obvious to me heh heh) value right away because I see the code I see where it ought to be and the new boss is really eager to see somethin, but I'm steamrolling toes and throwing elbows in eyes that I was entirely unaware of. I guarantee the people you will work with do not see you as a senior for some time, any misstep is a case against your status,
This is the best advice. And truly senior level people have been around long enough to see a lot of mid-level "senior" developers shoot themselves in the foot. I've also been on a lot of projects where bad practices aren't so bad because the team has strengths in other areas, and also best practices which collapse because the team has other deficiencies holding them back.
From my perspective simple boolean means a single known value stored in one variable. I suspect the underlying code performs a number of calculations for each one of the flow chart "booleans". Of course, maybe that points to a design flaw and there should be a single policy instance that aggregates all of the variables into one place.
If AI makes junior developers "better" than senior developers then what stops senior developers from adopting the tools and becoming once again better than the juniors?
> Coverage as a whole I think is useful only if you have an engineering organization that doesn't see the point in tests - which is going to be its own uphill battle.
I think coverage stats are always useful as they help find the edge cases that people forgot to test. A common culprit I've seen is error handling code where a bunch of tests target the happy path, but nothing tests the error logging when something breaks.
I think it's a more important feature than just a cosmetic color. Imagine if you bought a truck to haul cargo, but were then told it can only transport one type of cargo at a time. That would suck.
This is the best advice. And truly senior level people have been around long enough to see a lot of mid-level "senior" developers shoot themselves in the foot. I've also been on a lot of projects where bad practices aren't so bad because the team has strengths in other areas, and also best practices which collapse because the team has other deficiencies holding them back.