2. "...but in this case you have to show os some of your work from the past, so we can discuss this."
That is not always possible. There is always an NDA in contracts.
Imagine me going around and revealing the code I have done for your company...
3.
Are you going to pay extra those two engineers of your company for doing something
that is clearly outside what they were hired for at beginning or outside their competences?
4.
The same as 3.
Are you going to pay those employees for doing manager work instead?
Or the managers of your company are paid for doing nothing while showing doing something and soon ready,
as in your message, to download their responsibilities to simple engineers (company's leaves )?
Maybe that attitude works in a big company, but it won't fly in a smaller one. I'm a software engineer and I write plenty of code, but I also help out with interviews, packing, sales demos and proposals, customer support, general IT support, etc. Hell, I've fixed the coffee machine! I'd absolutely hate it if writing code was my only task.
However, here we are talking about at the general level. Not a single instance as your experience.
Engineers are hired for engineering jobs not for manager jobs or mopping the
floor.
On the other side, if a lately hired person wasn't find himself comfortable inside the team,
I, _as manager_, can always complain the team and accuse them being guilty because they weren't
able to say NO at interview level or because they said YES at the wrong candidate.
Do you see the faulty thought of our time?
I as manager earn a lot for managing people but in reality I download my
responsibilities of not being able to interview a candidate and so find the right person _downloading_
that on the team that actually is not responsible for new hired person. Fantastic.
Than's the meal they want you digest in some cultures.
In mine, as manager, I decide who is on board, and I clarify clearly the roles of every one.
No space for interpretation.
I din't come out from a manager school, but I started from the ground and I put myself _every time_
in the shoes of who is managed by me.
2. Then they do the take home challenge, or you hire another candidate.
3. No, normal wage and is expected of them.
4. That’s not manager work. It’s a tech talk, it needs to be with the tech people.
It’s really not that weird to have the team decide who they want to join their team
2. Then they do the take home challenge, or you hire another candidate.
This is not kindergarden anymore. We're taling adult stuff here.
If the manager is not able to interview, analyse and understand who is in
front of him, then it is time to change job.
Iff the candidates has personal work to show then it is considered a plus, but it is not
madnatory.
3. No, normal wage and is expected of them.
A hired person is supposed to fill a role and not a double or more roles just because the manager is not able to subdivides tasks, roles etc. I don't expect engineer or technical
roles to do manager job.
4. That’s not manager work. It’s a tech talk, it needs to be with the tech people.
It’s really not that weird to have the team decide who they want to join their team
It might work in your culture.
in my culture, who is going to take a manager role _manages_ technical people _and_
as such he _must_ know the technical stuff to a certain degrees otherwise the job is not for him.
Here managers don't download their responsibilities to engineers they manage.
At the same time, engineers are not supposed to judge or like or dislike their coworkers. Working
in a team is a prerequisite that they have to accept, either you like it or not. Full stop.
There is no space for interpretation or for leisure. They have tasks and they finish their tasks.
Full stop.
2. With us it is. Not for seniors, but juniors, interns, people out of college, we want to see how you program so we know how much effort the training is going to be.
3. We do not fill multiple roles. But if a person might join your team, the team gets to talk with the candidate. This always also becomes a tech talk because we’re developers and we like talking about it. That’s not a second job role at all.
4. Our managers are tech people. They are not always actual developers though, or might’ve been 20 years ago.
In general it goes like this:
Junior?
- talk with manager and tech lead of the team, just about who you are, what you’ve done and what you’re looking for. All to see if you are a match personality wise.
- if we liked the talk you get invited for a technical interview. You go sit with the team as they work, you get to do some challenge. We’ll help you and discuss your solutions
- we all together decide yes or no
For experienced developers we have the same, minus the coding challenge. The talk with the team is more about the personal match, but it usually is about tech stuff or what we’re working on because the candidate is curious.
I find it very natural and relaxed. The team eventually decides themselves which candidate they prefer.
Also I have no idea what you mean by there not being time for leisure. With us there definitely is, and liking the team you work in is very important to us. If you don’t like it or it’s not working we might place you in a different team where you match better. Or maybe you don’t think the apps we work on are interesting, but those of another team are. Why shouldn’t working somewhere be enjoyable?
I get paid to bring my knowledge and skills about computers and systems to bring business value to the company - to make them money or to save them money.
During the past decade, that has been as a “senior” employee of some sort. By senior I don’t mean just “I codez real gud”.
That has meant:
- Being on calls or flying out to a customer’s site to support sales in closing deals when I was working with B2B companies and later full time working at consulting companies.
- Interviewing candidates
- leading teams and come project management work.
- hands on keyboard coding
- DevOps [sic] setting up architecture for empty AWS accounts.
But I’m always up front about tradeoffs to management. If they want me to do one thing on the list, there is an expectation that something else on the list won’t get done. I don’t put in more than around 40 hours a week aside from the infrequent business travel.
> Are you going to pay extra those two engineers of your company for doing something that is clearly outside what they were hired for at beginning or outside their competences?
Why is it outside (and not just outside, but clearly outside) of what they were hired for or what their competencies are? Engineers work on the product. Engineers review each other's code. Engineers are a stakeholder in this whole process — after all, the candidate may become their future colleague, and engineers are best positioned to know what they want to see in a prospective colleague. Engineers can appreciate whether their peers have the desired skills.
Why does this activity require a higher pay than developing a new feature with your teammates?
No. In fact, the whole goal is to stay as close to "bare metal" as possible without any dependencies other than the browser (and Lit). I wrote an article[0] about this that you might find helpful.
>It doesn't really matter, these are just ways to draw into a native window and not the backend that owns that window.
I know. I mentioned them because I wanted to give a bit of context.
>Without interaction they aren't UI widgets, but merely organized graphics. You are only considering the easy, portable part of a GUI.
Again, I know.
>Consider the Windows API functions that deal with the GUI: they are comprehensive (particularly with respect to handling input and events),
>reasonably low level and more mature than anything you can design.
For sure they have been maintained for a long time but if you have followed the development of the basic ones (edit, checkboxes, combos etc)
and the common control ones (listview, treeeview) etc, you should have known how much they are a pin in the ass when it comes to customize
them (owner drawn and custom drawn). They were never updated by Microsoft but only extended. QT, for example, took the opposite side as an approach.
Everything is stretchable by default.
The trend nowadays is to use some sort of chromium embedded engine and building upon that your programs or web apps with CSS&HTML&JS.
Now, the fact that we have tons of RAMS, TBs of hard disks, and missiles as CPUs doesn't justify to have a more than 100GB of desktop
program just to say "Hello World!"
>I suggest Dear IMGUI and Qt...
Dear ImGUI is more appropriate for games logic than for desktop programs. QT has GBs of DLL you have to bring with you just to say, again, Hello World.
Additionally, you have to follow a university course to understand their policy regarding licences.
For desktop programs there is no need for a retained mode approach. I would consider both: a GUI you can build from an xml-alike file and
by interacting with objects.
Do you intend to support screen readers, voice input etc. with not very portable complex technology or to leave behind disabled end users for the sake of "simplicity" and portability?
More generally, what do you plan to do better than current multiplatform GUI libraries? A clear value proposition is necessary.
Before walking and running, it should be capable first of standing up.
Screen readers, voice input, etc are additional features one can add
once the "core" is done, in future steps.
My issues are basic. How to organize a hierarchy of UI widgets and
in a clean way such that it supports features like event notifications,
bubbling them, hovering, focusing, mouse capturing, and it is at the same scalable:
If I add another UI widgets later (a composition of basic and available ones),
it should be done with less efforts and leaving me to concentrate
on the new functionalities instead of replicating existing behaviors.
I was able to handle buttons, check boxes and single line text boxes
with a custom rendering system I can change at design time. But the
hierarchy of widgets, the design of C++ classes, and the event notification are
not clean (although working), hence the bells started to ring.
I mean custom as in "I wrote it myself". It's not based on a slow and bloated UI framework. Hopefully it's fairly standard from a Windows point of view though.
To me that’s a turnoff, you might get an IDE where the speed is faster, but updates and fixes will be slow to come because the team could not get over NIH.
Yeah, whenever I see something like that, my first thought is, “Doesn’t work like other apps on your OS, so will be a pain to get used to, will have weird inconsistencies, and won’t integrate properly with OS features that come standard with all other apps you run.
I know.
In theory, custom UI doesn't necessarily mean to have such freedom to "change" what UI's rules of the OS has been established.
It should sound more like, I don't use your way of rendering stuff.
That is not always possible. There is always an NDA in contracts. Imagine me going around and revealing the code I have done for your company...
3.
Are you going to pay extra those two engineers of your company for doing something that is clearly outside what they were hired for at beginning or outside their competences?
4.
The same as 3. Are you going to pay those employees for doing manager work instead? Or the managers of your company are paid for doing nothing while showing doing something and soon ready, as in your message, to download their responsibilities to simple engineers (company's leaves )?
Edited.