IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

IWETHEY Home / IWETHEY Board / Theory and Practice of Programming Forum / That would indicate (to the savvy manager, at least)...
Post #167,721
by jb4
Picture of jb4
8/5/04 2:02:59 PM
Reply
New That would indicate (to the savvy manager, at least)...
That the ratio of quality developers to noise is about 1:100.



(Now, we all know what the chances of this guy being a savvy manager is, don't we?

.
.
.

It'd be about 100:1.)
jb4
shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf. BULLSHIT
Post #167,725
by broomberg
8/5/04 2:30:57 PM
Reply
New Different levels of noise
We have several people currently who are Cold Fusion programmers. CF is an awful environment, but they can make it since and dance. But I've seen what they do to data, which means they would not be permitted to EVER insert or modify data without going through rules based wrappers that I write.

So they are 100% idiots when it comes to trusting them with data, while they are also 100% capable of creating a user interface that is usable.

Now, we will NOT be using CF (or any other web based environment) for this project. But the attitude toward what types of programmers are capable of what types of tasks stays the same.

User interfaces written by so-so programmers are almost all hardcode. Field names, placement, error checking, etc. Written by good programmers they are table driven, with a mangement interface created to modify the metadata. I consider a hardcode solution acceptable for this system.

Right now, it is SO hardcoded on the MF, in COBOL, that new users are added to the program and it is recompiled before they have access. Really!!!! The people who wrote this system are dumber than a bag of hammers, and it has worked fine for the last 10 years. It just does not give the most recent required report, which means time to do it again. Too many bags on the side already.
     Mono? - (broomberg) - (33) - Aug. 5, 2004, 12:21:57 AM EDT
         Why not Delphi in stead? (And Kylix in stead of Mono.) -NT - (CRConrad) - (19) - Aug. 5, 2004, 06:09:33 AM EDT
             It's dead - (broomberg) - (18) - Aug. 5, 2004, 10:10:14 AM EDT
                 Those words may come back to haunt you... ;-) - (admin) - Aug. 5, 2004, 10:28:20 AM EDT
                 Re: It's dead - (deSitter) - (3) - Aug. 5, 2004, 10:30:07 AM EDT
                     Ahhh...ahhhh....ahhh.....aychoochtml -NT - (FuManChu) - Aug. 5, 2004, 12:28:09 PM EDT
                     We discussed both - (broomberg) - (1) - Aug. 5, 2004, 01:44:55 PM EDT
                         Acrobat forms = javascript - (deSitter) - Aug. 5, 2004, 02:00:36 PM EDT
                 That would indicate (to the savvy manager, at least)... - (jb4) - (1) - Aug. 5, 2004, 02:02:59 PM EDT
                     Different levels of noise - (broomberg) - Aug. 5, 2004, 02:30:57 PM EDT
                 The glimpses you provide into corporate decision making - (tuberculosis) - (10) - Aug. 5, 2004, 06:05:58 PM EDT
                     Re: The glimpses you provide into corporate decision making - (deSitter) - (8) - Aug. 5, 2004, 06:09:52 PM EDT
                         I don't think it has to work that way - (tuberculosis) - (7) - Aug. 5, 2004, 08:48:25 PM EDT
                             Huh? - (broomberg) - (6) - Aug. 5, 2004, 09:00:24 PM EDT
                                 Its a lot easier to teach a programmer business than - (tuberculosis) - (5) - Aug. 5, 2004, 10:02:09 PM EDT
                                     "Conventional" is there for a reason - (broomberg) - (4) - Aug. 5, 2004, 10:30:04 PM EDT
                                         I object to your characterization - (tuberculosis) - (3) - Aug. 5, 2004, 11:04:39 PM EDT
                                             No, but you'll take a chance on an - (broomberg) - (2) - Aug. 6, 2004, 12:08:05 AM EDT
                                                 If I were you - (tuberculosis) - (1) - Aug. 6, 2004, 12:18:38 AM EDT
                                                     Done - (broomberg) - Aug. 6, 2004, 06:39:31 AM EDT
                     Sorry - (broomberg) - Aug. 5, 2004, 06:35:30 PM EDT
         Mono will be more... - (folkert) - (6) - Aug. 5, 2004, 11:43:50 AM EDT
             To paraphrase: "Mono. a better .NET than .NET" - (jb4) - (5) - Aug. 5, 2004, 02:05:22 PM EDT
                 You like? Yeah, wow, great - just look how that helped OS/2! -NT - (CRConrad) - (4) - Aug. 6, 2004, 05:28:54 AM EDT
                     What?!? "A better OS2 than OS2"? - (jb4) - (3) - Aug. 12, 2004, 03:18:20 PM EDT
                         Windows 3.1 -> WinOS2 -NT - (deSitter) - (1) - Aug. 12, 2004, 03:22:13 PM EDT
                             OT: Remember MS Sql Server running on OS/2? - (mmoffitt) - Aug. 12, 2004, 10:31:14 PM EDT
                         No, you nitwit, the other way around! - (CRConrad) - Aug. 13, 2004, 06:37:32 AM EDT
         snoball for a front end? - (boxley) - Aug. 5, 2004, 02:18:07 PM EDT
         Re: Mono? - (altmann) - Aug. 5, 2004, 05:48:12 PM EDT
         I'm confused. - (Another Scott) - (3) - Aug. 5, 2004, 06:03:55 PM EDT
             Very observant - (broomberg) - (2) - Aug. 5, 2004, 06:41:33 PM EDT
                 Suggestion - (ben_tilly) - (1) - Aug. 5, 2004, 07:46:37 PM EDT
                     Hmm. - (broomberg) - Aug. 5, 2004, 07:48:22 PM EDT

Goo goo goo joob!
48 ms