> It’s hard to do test-first TDD “mindlessly” because writing a test usually forces you to think in terms of the specification of the behavior you’re about to implement.
Tests are code. Code can be sloppy, fallible, useless. Writing a consumer before you write a provider doesn't make either more robust, just the point at which they meet more clear. You can certainly write a test that uses a function, but the test doesn't actually test anything at all, just that the function exists. aka "mindless TDD".
A mandatory meeting in which all developers must be present and regurgitate status updates to the entire team, as an example, assumes this information wouldn't get to relevant parties organically and all team members must consume all status updates.
> We need to be able to see each other in the eye.
This isn't what happens during webcam meetings. If you're looking at the camera (to try and provide eye contact), you're not able to see anyone looking back at you.
> Managers, especially, should set the right example and turn their on cameras - and ask their team to do so too.
Definitely not, and I wouldn't work for a manager that cared if my camera was on or not.
Don't estimate. They don't matter and nobody cares about them anyway. If you're a sales driven/feature factory company, the estimates won't matter anyway as you'll demand to meet your obligations regardless of estimates.
If you're a company that plans far in advance, the same is true. You'll demand the work you wanted is done at a given date, again regardless of how difficult it was.
At my company, we have a well maintained backlog of work. We pick dates in the future to check in on what got done in between check ins. The product manager can (re)prioritize work as needed. We pull from the top. If there's a surprise deadline it gets brought up to everyone and then put at the top of the queue, sometimes over currently in-progress tasks.
You cannot bend the realities of time and complexity. If something is hard, an estimate doesn't make it easier. A hard delivery date also doesn't bring predictability. Ultimately, with or without estimates, you'll get what you get. If you want to get _more_, ask a team what's making them slow and then prioritize fixing the things they bring up. If every team is working optimally (they're not), hire.
I'll also add, the time it takes to prepare an estimate of any value is probably 10x what anybody asking you to estimate something is willing to provide. You're being asked to spit out a number to fit an existing narrative. If you wanted to estimate a unit of work with any amount of legitimacy, you'd need hours/days/weeks (depending on SOW). These companies scheduling weekly estimation meetings that last an hour and are bullshit scrum cards don't matter and aren't interested in being even close to correct.
> Most devs have to know the commands and configuration to do rolling deployments on the target infrastructure, fetch logs, how the readiness protocoll integrates with automatic restarts, ingress, etc.
Is this serious? You think _most devs_, meaning a group that includes FE devs, mobile app devs, IoT, open source, DBAs, security engineers, need to know these things?
> With k8s, all this is standard and transferable. With ad-hoc simpler solutions, this is all per-team tribal knowledge, and in my experience it's not even simpler to use for us devs.
Most teams do not have to manage most/all of the things you're describing.
This really feels like more K8s marketing disguised as a HN post.
> Then why do you start running forward instantly when you press “W” in counterstrike or quake? Why not just deploy servers closer to users?
You do both? Game client handles movements and writes game state changes to a server, which should be close to the user to reduce the possibility for invalid state behaviors? You really haven't seen online games that deploy servers all over the world to reduce latency for their users? What?
Both web apps and games do optimistic server writes. Both web apps and games have to accommodate a failed write. Both web apps and games handle local state and remote state differently.
What rights? Businesses have the right to refuse service. Governments have always required vaccine verification. This is just whining. There are no rights implications here.
Also calling me a nazi isn't really appropriate, I don't think.
I've been paying attention to Zig posts on HN, mostly just because it seems well-liked and I think Andrew Kelley is interesting/smart. Would it be fair to say that Zig is to C, what Rust is to C++? Or are they both just kind of...low-ish-level systems languages solving similar problems, differently?
> when discussing homeless people being told to move somewhere cheaper.
What an absolutely insane whataboutism. This has nothing to do with what we're discussing and you look like a joke. You're asserting that vaccine passports infringe upon your freedoms. Just don't go to those bars. Jesus.
> Except now I’m supposed to show a digital vaccine record many places I go. Not many open source options exist for reading them either, so I’m just supposed to trust that the data (name, birth date, maybe location) isn’t being sent to some marketing analytics company somewhere.
If you think vaccine passports are bad just wait until you hear about all phones...
If by "clear things up", you mean behave with hostility towards someone pointing out your bullshit, sure, you sure did.
> I don't see any claim by me that I was explaining why it is more elegant.
Yes, from _my_ post.
> Elegance is a term developers love to throw around to get out of having to define why something is or is not good. Your answer is nothing more than "I like it more".
> Would you say the same about beauty?
Philosophical debates are cute and this is whataboutism. You're using a subjective term to compare two concepts as though that term is shared universally by others. It's not. To quote me: You like it more.
> 1. Just because you don't explain something (why 0-based is elegant) doesn't make it any less true or more subjective.
Not don't, can't. Or more directly, it's subjective. You like it more. You saying why you think something is more elegant doesn't make any other person agree with you. Because it's subjective.
> 2. Lots of things like beauty and elegance are PARTIALLY subjective. There is room for debate. But that doesn't mean that everyone completely disagrees with each other and there's no shared consensus.
Cute whataboutism.
> 3. Elegance doesn't just mean "you like it more". Beauty and elegance are reasons to like things more.
Subjective reasons to like something more.
> This is a weird debate.
It would be a debate if it were possible to have debates about things that were subjective, but it's not, which is my whole point. You like it more.
> For large PHP setups it is usually the number of database connections that is the limiting factor,
For pretty much every modern programming language, IO is the bottleneck over everything else.
To save you some time, there are practically no metrics in which I think PHP beats another programming language other than maturity, and even then, not really.