Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

You have a "great programmer" on the team that keeps on creating stuff that the others can't review or contribute to unless something more common is enforced.



This guy sounds like the stereotypical "rockstar" developer. These types create endless drama and ruin team dynamics by insisting that everything be done their way due to their supposed brilliance. The situation you're in now is exhibit A. Expect more of the same at every turn from here on out.

Also, food for thought: if nobody can review his code, what evidence of his "greatness" exists other than his saying so?


Getting shit done and pleasing clients can be seen as "greatness."

I write a shitload of PHP/jquery - and no one reviews my code. If it's done fast and works as expected my bosses don't care... and they'll listen to me over the front-end dev who wants to use React/Ruby.

Now I don't 'hate' any language and will try new things, but my point is that the definition of greatness can be completely different between companies, especially when the company isn't a tech company.


You're right, but the fact that this guy is hung up on the language at the expense of team productivity makes me suspect he's not the "getting shit done" type.


I'm so old I remember when willingness and ability to learn and use new languages was considered a basic trait of a competent professional programmer.


It's not just the ability to learn and use.

Language learning does not stop when one becomes proficient in it. You keep learning new usage patterns, all the corner cases and nasty surprised and start to remember libraries and their features. You become gradually better and faster in the language you use. After decade or so you can become really good.

For a really experienced programmer there is a drop in productivity even if they are able to learn and use language better than more junior programmers.


Haha yes good luck with that now with "full stack node" programmers etc. In their defense, every framework they use redefines their language to the extent it is a new language :)


> You have a "great programmer" on the team that keeps on creating stuff that the others can't review or contribute to unless something more common is enforced.

What good are they, then? If the decision to use Python has already been made and acted on then a mediocre Python programmer who can actually commit would be more useful that a genius whose code is useless to the project.


Yeah, I feel like the "great programmer" is the real problem, not Python.




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

Search: