職務経験
類似するその他のプロフィール
その他の投稿を確認
-
Lucas Wargha
Pair programming is criminally underrated. I spent half the day pairing with an engineer on my team—we moved faster, solved tougher problems, and both walked away sharper. It’s one of the fastest ways to level up engineers and ship better software, both in the short and long term. If your team isn’t pairing regularly, you’re leaving a lot of value on the table. I recently spoke with a junior engineer at a meetup who said he’s never pair programmed. He’s gotten quick tips here and there, but never truly collaborated side-by-side. It made me think: how much more could he have learned—and contributed—if pairing had been part of his growth from the start? If you haven’t paired in a while, give it a shot—you might be surprised by how much you learn and how much better the work gets.
240件のコメント -
Rob Rothman
Software Engineers are some of the smartest individuals I've had the pleasure of interacting with. However, I still find myself scratching my head when startups make offers and engineers use flawed logic to weigh one offer against another. Higher equity dollar value does not = better offer. I don't care if Startup A offers you $500k in equity, and Startup B offers you $100k in equity. If Startup A isn't around a year from now, that $500k is worth nothing. Z-E-R-O. It means nothing. Some put such a heavy emphasis on total compensation, that they forget the basics: -Is the startup's business model viable long-term? -Can the company survive in a market downturn? -Can the leadership team can deliver through the good times + the bad? -Do they have an exit strategy? -Do their customers actually like the product compared to their competitors? -Are the people you interviewed with excited about the outlook of the company? ^more of these types of questions will give you better odds of hitting the 'startup lottery'. not pie in the sky numbers on a spreadsheet
3件のコメント -
Steven Syrek
"Engineers need very specific requirements." I overheard this today, thankfully not from someone at my company. But it pissed me off. This statement implies that software engineers can't think through complex and ambiguous customer problems, that they need someone to carefully prepare very specific widget designs for them to build. That they can't figure out the very specific requirements themselves, if necessary. I suppose if the requirements weren't specific enough, they might ask questions! Questions that only the customer can answer! And maybe not even them! And then maybe they would have to figure it out for themselves and iterate on an idea until the customer is satisfied! Oh no! I'm sure the person who said this was acting in good faith, but siloing engineers off and only feeding them "requirements" robs them of the opportunity to understand and solve the real problems and have real impact. It also wastes time with unnecessary feedback loops. Worst of all, it holds them back from growing into more product and business-oriented directions, which can have a negative impact: on their careers. The next time someone tells you that engineers need very specific requirements, don't argue. Just ask to invite the engineers to the next meeting to discuss the requirements with them directly. Bring them into the process. If you get pushback, go to the engineers directly. The best software engineers I know would appreciate it.
24件のコメント -
Muhammad Abdullah
Being a software engineer means you signed up for lifelong learning. Frameworks change. Languages evolve. Best practices today become bad practices tomorrow. If you’re not learning, you’re falling behind. If you’re not adapting, you’re becoming outdated. The truth? Your degree or bootcamp got you started. Your curiosity and consistency will keep you relevant. In tech, the mindset that says “I’ve learned enough” is the same mindset that quietly kills careers. Stay hungry. Stay curious. Keep building. Because in this field, learning never ends. #SoftwareEngineering #CodingLife #TechCareers #Developers #Programming
6件のコメント -
Gergely Orosz
Someone** asked me about my advice to devs for "traditional software engineers" who resist change. Being a true tech professional means you keep your toolset sharp, and up-to-date. If you refuse to do so, you are probably not a true professional, but opted to be either a hobbyist or someone who voluntarily retired from the profession, or plans to retire real soon. Both are fine - but don't be surprised if those looking for true professionals pass over you. ** this "someone" was my Japanese Translator for The Software Engineer's Guidebook, to be published by O'Reilly, with some additional content in it, like this one. I really dig their approach!
53件のコメント -
Ryan Holdaway
In the early days of code bootcamps, hiring grads was hard because we didn’t really know what to do with them. The company I worked for established a code school -> QA Engineer -> SWE pipeline and had a ton of success both getting value and training people. In a world of AI enhanced engineers, I think we go back to that. Manual QA has never been more important or effective.
6件のコメント -
Michael Gribben
In 9 months, the best tool in my toolkit as a software engineer went from singleline autocomplete to multiline autocomplete to CLI-based coding agents to Slack-based coding agents. The creative destruction in this space is one hell of a rollercoaster! Recently, I have gone full throttle on agentic coding. That is, putting an LLM in the driver’s seat when writing code while I navigate in the passenger’s seat. And I think there is no going back. Here are 9 miscellaneous observations over the past 9 months: 1) Expect your productivity to decrease at first. The best way to learn how to work with LLMs is to work with LLMs but they are really not good at some things. You will only know to avoid the agentic traps like it infinitely fixing its own errors by first falling into the traps. 2) Don’t buy an annual subscription. I’ve moved more time from Windsurf to Claude Code but I’m still stuck with 6 months left of a 12 month Cursor subscription I don’t touch anymore. 3) Pick a tool that is token unconstrained. I can really tell the difference between tools that charge by month and tools that charge by token. If your employeer values your time, the cost doesn't matter. 4) LLMs love context, so give it to them. An early mistake I made was writing one sentence and expecting my bugs to be squashed. Now, I write paragraphs and pages. 5) The fastest way to give context is to ramble using a dictation tool. But if you work in an office, you will look crazy. 6) Improvements to your docs are now multiplied. LLMs never learn and always make the same mistakes unless you write your lessons down somewhere. 7) Improvements to your developer experience are now multiplied. Previously, I would manually run a linter to stop LLMs spending too long fixing linting errors line-by-by. Now, I get a PR that passes CI. 8) An under-discussed skill is knowing when to go back to artisanally writing code by hand. 9) Everyone who raves about agentic coding always writes their blog posts by hand. I hope the last 2 points give hope to anyone who fears LLMs will take everyone’s jobs.
16件のコメント
アメリカ合衆国のSerena Fangという名前のその他のユーザー
LinkedInにはアメリカ合衆国のSerena Fangという名前のユーザーが他に9人います
Serena Fangという名前のその他のユーザーを表示