Comment by quickthrower2
4 years ago
This is why I think most of the 'absolutes' that programmers, software architects, managers etc. talk about are not so.
For example you must never declare 'magic numbers' in code. Or you must always obey S.O.L.I.D. or get 100% TDD. There will be be people who believe in these dogmatically to the point they won't employ anyone who says different (it becomes an interview question).
I am not arguing that these are wrong!
I am arguing that they are not evidence driven (they cannot be, software is to complex, it is not a narrow experiment on a lab mouse). So they must be culture/preference/worldview driven.
When there is no evidence driven approach to 99% of your decisions on software it becomes: an art. And that is fine.
That said it might be possible to show evidence that an approach is good for your code base, for your team, as that is a more limited scope, rather than "in general".
What isn't fine is the number of overly confident global assertions we hear from software people about how to build software.
> There will be be people who believe in these dogmatically to the point they won't employ anyone who says different (it becomes an interview question).
Though when you’re lucky enough to be in a tight labor market it sure is a convenient filter for companies you don’t want to join!
Yes it is a no brain filter too. They have already rejected me so I don’t have to think about accepting them ;-)
Seriously though I hate shibboleth driven interviews.