I have spent much of my career developing software to meet state pr Federal government requirements. Usually, I am working at a smaller subcontractor. What scares me is doing a demo of the finished product for the customer and finding out that the specification document did not contain some crucial requirement.
In the "good ol' days," you could make the changes required, charge the government and usually get away with the "cost overrun." In today's political climate, attempting that will get you a few column inches in the local newspaper and, if you are really unlucky, an interview with an aggressive TV reporter. The legal nicety of saying that we delivered what you contracted for gets lost in the political finger-pointing. Either way, don't expect to submit a successful bid for a year or two.
Great timing for this one. We have a "principal" software engineer (notice the quotes) who decided to hand off a build to QA from code that hasn't been checked into source control. Just a random build from unknown code.
This person thinks that's acceptable, too. Talk about bush league. This I would expect from an intern, not someone with years of experience. Perhaps they're used to being sloppy and not using a build process.
Naturally, QA runs into issues so I can't help them because:
1) Not checked in to SVN so I can't fix the problem
2) I have no way to know if what code they're testing with.
3) No traceability of source code
Oh yeah - we're supposed to release this week!
"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music."
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
I don't quite get what you mean by "experiment the same". As for the profile? It's just how my head works. By no means did I, nor would I, spend a lot of time on it.
Taking a leap at what you want - it's really just nature. Various people on and off CodeProject have their own nature and that leads them to how the do 'things' that can be done many ways. Coding does reflect quite a bit of the coder's nature.
Mine - I don't seem to have any boundaries in how my mind stores information. The cost of my last purchase of Jamaican Curry powder could be mentally adjacent to how a foreach loop is written in php. It doesn't matter - all things are part of all problem solving. There's a Latin quote for that: "If I cannot find a way I'll make one" - it's Hannible or Alexander the Great, or someone like that. That kind of view along with embracing insanity with gusto.
Look below, if you wish, to the link "Ravings en mass"
Me? - I'm heading home within the next few seconds.
I'm with you on that one. I have an app that was supposed to demonstrate to the user that we could gather their data from multiple sources, ingest it and spit it back out on a webpage. New items kept getting added to it for "demonstration" purposes. It has now been in prod for 3+ years and they just keep adding to it. It's a horrible POS I have to maintain.
Oh, god. I have something similar. I'm withholding names and won't go into specifics to protect the innocent.
At a previous job, I'd been telling the boss for years something he wanted automated couldn't be automated, unless he hired somebody to maintain the automation code, pretty much as a full-time job. Basically, the process being automated was a moving target.
So one day he decided to go ahead anyway and wrote the code over a weekend. It only worked for a week. And yes, somebody had to maintain his code all the time from that point forward.