|
4. Someone with a great sense of humor.
5. Someone who is great at making coffee.
6. Someone who would make a great scapegoat if the project fails.
7. Someone who always brings donuts.
8. Your own identical twin.
Pablo.
"Accident: An inevitable occurrence due to the action of immutable natural laws." (Ambrose Bierce, circa 1899).
"You are to act in the light of experience as guided by intelligence" (Rex Stout, "In the Best Families", 1950).
|
|
|
|
|
If above options are listed, I will select all options.
But if I force to select any one then I would love to select 4th 
Thanks,
•…♥…ЯΚ…♥…•
|
|
|
|
|
4 & 5 for me. (6 if needed  )
Piyush K Singh
|
|
|
|
|
|
A really smart fast learner who has a vast depth and breadth of experience but doesn't know the main technology of the current project
That's sort of contradictory - if he/she has vast depth and breadth of experience, then that seems to imply they would know the main technology.
An expert in the technology used in the current program who knows nothing of anything else and doesn't want to learn.
You don't become an expert and not know anything else and not want to learn.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I disagree, I'm afraid.
I have depth and breadth of experience in computing generally, but I've never even looked at F#...so I wouldn't know the technology if handed a project based on it. (I would however, enjoy getting paid to learn something new!)
And I've known experts (UNIX guru's and COBOLista's mainly) who know everything about the subject (not so willing to let that knowledge out though) who never showed even the slightest interest in learning anything outside their narrow specialisation.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: but I've never even looked at F#
OK, but you do have OO experience, good analytical skills, etc. Even with C#, you've probably written in a functional style, what with Linq, lambda expressions, Action<t> and Func<t> all being the rage nowadays. But I get your point.
OriginalGriff wrote: who never showed even the slightest interest in learning anything outside their narrow specialisation.
Hmmm..Well, perhaps you have a point. I would never want to work with someone like that!
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Fortunately, I think t'interwebs made them redundant - we only suffered in silence while they had knowledge we needed but they wouldn't reveal (except in tiny drips and drabs). Or possibly, they all became project managers... 
|
|
|
|
|
Plus, it turns out that many of those self-avowed "experts" are, in fact, dumbasses.
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: That's sort of contradictory - if he/she has vast depth and breadth of experience, then that seems to imply they would know the main technology.
How so? He might be well-versed in the problem domain, yet a complete programming n00b (or vice versa).
However, yeah, depends on how I stand ith the project.
|
|
|
|
|
peterchen wrote: How so? He might be well-versed in the problem domain, yet a complete programming n00b (or vice versa).
Because nowadays, being a domain expert, at least in my opinion, isn't a narrow thing anymore. The same is true in mathematics, physics, biology, chemistry, etc. - to be an expert in a field, you actually have to work with multiple domains. For example, I can't be an expert in web development without knowing at least one (though several is better!) server-side web language and framework as well as Javascript, Ajax, JQuery, most likely some database stuff including SQL, and of course CSS. This doesn't even begin to address the different technology stacks on top of the core components.
And also in my experience, I've worked with several PhD people that were though of to be well versed in the problem domain and created all sorts of complex equations in higher order math that, you know what, reduced down to a lookup table in one case. Frankly, because of the only way they could think was within the confines of their "domain", their thinking was limited and in fact horribly inefficient, and that to me means that the person is actually not well-versed in the problem domain!
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
If someone no longer wants to learn they are no longer interested and more likely not going to adapt to change.
Suggest they retire and make space for those who do have the desire to develop/progress/evolve.
|
|
|
|
|
I hire developers regularly to work with me on my teams. When partnering/hiring for a specific project I am fine with a domain expert (which usually means they ARE good at learning - they just don't want to right now - how else did they become an expert in a fast changing field - yes there ARE experts). But I were looking longer term I'd go with the person with the learning attitude and track record of learning quickly. So for THIS question - I answered: the expert.
peter horwood aka Madman Pierre, VP Development, Asset Pro Solutions Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
That's the thing right there.
It feels like not the most politically correct answer but it's what I've been trying to express in my previous comments.
|
|
|
|
|
long term? Everything is so Agile and short sighted these days. Quick and dirty
dev
|
|
|
|
|
So many of us tend to come off like we know more than we actually do. Most of us Google topics daily because we don't know or forgot how to do something (which means we don't know it). We always need to be excited about learning and always willing to learn something new.
|
|
|
|
|
My manager has kept on assigning me to work with a specific co-worker (name withheld to protect the innocent)... He does almost nothing to do anything with the software development projects... Just slackening (surfing) and using his "boss mode" (data storage server - web-based version) whenever he hears anyone walking toward his office. He tends to wait for me to complete my tasks then hand over his tasks to me. All he does was to "give command", nod his head, and looking "busy" at his office. ARGH!
I rather to work with someone who has good knowledge (like other co-worker who has been seriously working on the project with me - but now is in other group  )
|
|
|
|
|
The option should really say "Neither. I'll do his/her part of the project myself.", or the indeterminate "their" rather than assuming the male pronoun.
|
|
|
|
|
No; "his" is correct. "Their" is incorrect for an individual.
Even better would be for it to say, "I work alone".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can't tell if serious or trolling.
Just in case: "Lighten up, Francis"
|
|
|
|
|
1) Someone who doesn't want to learn is trouble in this business. Change is the one constant.
2) An outsider, technology-wise, can bring a fresh perspective and perhaps new techniques for accomplishing the task at hand, as well as bringing fresh, naïve eyes to the code review.
3) It's lonely working alone, truly.
Therefore, I choose the learner.
|
|
|
|
|
You might reconsider if you have 2 weeks, or any other limited amount of time compared to the work to be done, to finish the project.
Then you should pick the guy that already know all about the job and start writing code without any further delays.
|
|
|
|
|
That's a good point, Alex.
|
|
|
|
|
Considering that rapid rate of change that our industry moves at I don't personally believe in experts of technology. I do however believe in experts in learning or at the very least people who embrace change and the challenge of always learning new things.
you want something inspirational??
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
