> Good developers are the ones that create code that resists the slide from a 10x code-base to a 0.1x code-base.
10x is 100 times bigger than 0.1x FWIW.
> but I argue that it is at least partly due to the prevailing code-base.
Its almost exclusively because of the prevailing code-base. We can't forget that the prevailing code base was built by developers of varying skills. You can have "100x" developers build it or you can have "0.1x" developers build it.
> One of my least favorite people to work with is also a "high throughput" developer who is a prolific creator of software, but everything created by this person is an un-maintainable, un-documented, un-tested, brittle block of procedural copy-pasta that ends up in the critical business path. And yes, this developer "snapped" about a year ago and it has been a 3 person project ever since to scramble to fix this stuff.
Was this person the aforementioned "Rick" from this article?
10x is 100 times bigger than 0.1x FWIW.
> but I argue that it is at least partly due to the prevailing code-base.
Its almost exclusively because of the prevailing code-base. We can't forget that the prevailing code base was built by developers of varying skills. You can have "100x" developers build it or you can have "0.1x" developers build it.
> One of my least favorite people to work with is also a "high throughput" developer who is a prolific creator of software, but everything created by this person is an un-maintainable, un-documented, un-tested, brittle block of procedural copy-pasta that ends up in the critical business path. And yes, this developer "snapped" about a year ago and it has been a 3 person project ever since to scramble to fix this stuff.
Was this person the aforementioned "Rick" from this article?