http://qs321.pair.com?node_id=311233


in reply to Re3: The crime under reusability
in thread The crime under reusability

In this context, being "lucky" means getting away with having your own opinion and acting consequently, not everyone is in such a luxury position. Nearly being fired is not being fired, it's an unpleasant experience, but has no consequences when compared to actually being fired. A contract that is terminated early is no disaster either if you can get another.

What I mean is that it is fine for the likes of you and Abigail-II to speak your mind: you're good programmers who'll manage to find something else if the worst comes to the worst. Both of you seem very competent, so if you think some design is flawed, chances are quite big that it actually is.

But again, this is my point: most programmers are not that good. If they get fired, it's not easy to find a new job nowadays.

Another important point: I wouldn't like to work with lesser gifted people who simply ignore the design since they're a liability to the project.

A last point: when you're working in a team, you're supposed to play by the rules. Not many people will tolerate that you go solo, and again, when less accomplished programmers are involved, with very good reason.

Don't let your own competence cloud your judgment about these matters. Just my 2 cents, -gjb-

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: The crime under reusability
by Abigail-II (Bishop) on Dec 01, 2003 at 14:15 UTC
    Another important point: I wouldn't like to work with lesser gifted people who simply ignore the design since they're a liability to the project.
    I, on the other hand, don't like to work with people who don't want to take responsibility, and don't speak up when they think the design is wrong. Or even worse, people who don't think about the design at all, and just accept it as is. Even if their ideas are incorrect, at least they show commitment and the ability to form independent ideas.

    Abigail