Skip to main content

Too Important to Fix Bugs?

Think about the role you play in development.  do you write new code or do you fix bugs?

It's a trick question!  Every developer's role should including fixing bugs.  We created them and we should take responsibility in fixing them too.  The notion that a developer is so important creating new code that they don't have time to fix their own error is ... well... to say the least, problematic on so many levels.  It's a problem with the company, project and the code that is written.

The notion that developers that fix code are not at the same level of those assigned to new features is backwards.  Those that fix bugs have a very difficult job.  They:

  • Do not have as much knowledge about the code as the original author.
  • Work in a wide variety of code written by multiple developers and styles.
  • Should not break any other code.  
  • Do not get to refactor code but have to fix the code in place with the current design.  Even if that design is the problem.
  • Make the product and other developers look good.
  • Can have some of the most complete knowledge of the project as a whole.

I once had a developer that was acting as QA on some code say they where "just being an A@@Hole like QA and finding bugs".  

To which my reply was "You mean like finding what we did wrong?".

The bottom line is that we should :

  • Fix out own errors.
  • Count our blessings every day that we have QA and people that are good at fixing bugs.

    

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

My Current Desktop and Happy Vining.

It's been a big switch when I quit my old procession (Software Engineer) and ventured into the unknown.  So this is my current desktop.   First it's a REAL desktop and not a computer screen. Second, I've had to learn a whole new set of tools.  You would think a pencil is just a pencil and a paint brush is just a paint brush, but noooooo, they are tools into you mind and that's what needs re-tooling. The tactual nature of these tools and operation as much more rewarding (and frustrating too) than typing code in an IDE.   That had it's incentive but that well went dry and life changes,  so I changed. The pleasure of creating colors (no RGB involved) ad hoc wise is interesting.  Getting the technique to merge them on paper is very tough.  You do not know what you're going to get, so you just have to go with it. I'm glad that I can do a lot of other things instead of Software, but I hope that others in my past procession work on other pa...

3rd Try is a Charm

I've been trying to draw / paint these barns for a couple of years but never felt or got them right.  This time I think they turned out right. So What went wrong before and what's right now with this drawing?  This time, the light was right.  It's coming from the upper right and the shadows just looked right.  The other thing is the corn field on the left had to "be in season", otherwise it's just a plowed field.  I had taken other photos from different angles but they never felt right.  This angle has the road, power lines, corn field, etc. all leading to the right.  The shadows on the lower right helps fill in that corner (don't forget about the corners!).  The last part is trying to draw (ink paint maybe) the trees in the background.  Not so easy when they are kind of a blob is green shades. So yeah, it's composition that is king.  Many times I just don't see it until the drawing / painting is finished and when it's right it feels goo...

Thought Patterns

I know how I work.  How a think about, visualize a problem and go about mentally design a solution and implement it in code.  My thought pattern works pretty well for me on most occasions, but not always. There are times when I have a force myself to change my thought pattern because of the problem I'm solving requires a different mindset.  Anyway, this posting is about how I work most of the time.  Here is goes. I quickly break down a feature into operations that are required to exists and tackle that code first.  My thinking is that, if I can solve the primary issues first, then secondary features will fall into "known knowns" and I can address those at anytime (and sometimes at my leisure) and this allows me to meet my internal timeline. If I addressed features and operations that are not primary first, then I feel I risk my (and the projects) timeline without addressing issues that allow the feature to operate.  You may have seen this occur where...