Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Setting aside all the imposter syndrome, confidence, etc stuff...

The only devs I've known who I thought were legitimately bad were the ones who thought they weren't. The devs who couldn't accept that their code was overly complicated, because in that moment they had no problem reading it. Or who would come out of the end of a project without any ability or desire to think about why or how the project went wrong.

Some devs dig deep into the language and libraries, some don't. There's need for both kinds of devs out there, even if there isn't at your company. Some devs know every design pattern out there, some don't. I often prefer the devs who don't -- my goal is to quickly build software that is easy to debug and easy to add on to, and people seem to usually get caught up in putting whatever type of factory where a factory shouldn't be and...

Really, though, we all suck. I've got senior devs from Amazon and Microsoft who don't know or care about dependency management or how to write integration tests or... whatever.

What do you want to be good at? Intentionally pick a thing. Not "programming" but do you want to be the best at debugging your team's software? Do you want to know all the gotchas and tricks of your team's language & framework(s)? Do you want to own a particular bit of your company's business logic? Pick a small thing you want to be the best at, figure out what that actually means, and then master that thing. Even if "that thing" is just being able to quickly add simple, not-awful-to-maintain features. Grade yourself on that, not every single thing you might see some particular other developer do better at than you.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: