All posts by Stephen Darlington

Blog

In The Open

I recently shared a blog post entitled “The Most Successful Developers Share More Than They Take” with the comment:

I try to practice “public by default” though, because of my work, it’s often “on the internal wiki” rather than fully open.

Unfortunately the article spends a lot of time talking about blogging and podcasting which, perhaps, undermined the point I was trying to make. If you want to write blogs, speak on podcasts, and present at conferences, good luck to you1. Not everyone will want to do those things, and that’s fine. I’m not advocating for that. I think most people can do what I meant.

Here’s the key point: make your “content” as widely available as practicable. Allow people to pull when it’s convenient for them rather than you push the information you assume they’d be interested in.

In this context, “public” doesn’t have to mean on the internet or even visible to your entire company. Nor does it mean pushing it to everyone. Updates do not need to land in everyone’s inbox.

Here are a few examples.

I work on multiple projects with a number of different clients. When I make notes, or update the status, or write meeting minutes, I put them on the company wiki rather than keep them on my local machine. My manager might be interested in how often I’m meeting with a specific client. The product team might be interested to learn which clients are using Kubernetes. I wouldn’t share most of this outside the company, but internally it’s not confidental.

If I build a small demo for a client or play with some software, I push my toy project to GitHub. Depending on what it is, it might be limited only to my team, more widely to any of my colleagues or it might be public, but I’ll be as open with it as I can.

If I’m researching something, a new technology or how to implement a particular use case, I’ll put my notes on the wiki.

If I ask a question, I will typically ask it in a public Slack channel rather than as a direct message.

An important aspect of all of these things is that I was already typing the information. The only difference is that instead of keeping it on my local machine or sharing with individuals, it’s “public.”

It means that other people can see the current state of my projects without asking for it. This immediately benefits me because I’m lazy. But in a distributed environment, where timezones are significant, it can save everyone time.

Asking questions in public can get answers from unexpected sources. That new guy might have experience you didn’t know about. Someone in a nearby timezone might get you an answer hours earlier than you were expecting. The person you would have asked might not know or be on vacation.

There are downsides, of course. If you ask a stupid question in public, then everyone will see how dumb you are. Your notes might document a terrible, old technology that you shouldn’t be using at all, or your solution might fail horribly.

But here’s the thing: you’re not stupid. I bet other people have a similar misunderstanding. And the journey itself can be interesting. As Kepler noted:

“What matters to me is not merely to impart to the reader what I have to say, but above all to convey to him the reasons, subterfuges, and lucky hazards which led me to my discoveries.”

Those “lucky hazards” might help other avoid the same mistakes. Can we fix the documentation? Include it in the company induction? Is there a blog or a conference talk in it?2 These steps may require a little extra work but they have benefits for everyone, from future you, to your colleagues and your customers.

Someone is wrong on the internet.

The other thing is that it’s a good strategy for getting the right answer. People can be too busy to respond, right up to the point where they find that Someone On The Internet Was Wrong. People are more likely to offer to fix your work more readily than they will be to come up with a working solution from scratch.

What if no one looks up your status updates? What happens when your notes go unread? Well… nothing. You were already writing the notes and no one except you read them. Worst case, you’re exactly where you were.

In short, this is a terrible process if you want to be seen as being right all the time. However, if you value getting to the right answer and acknowledge that you’re a fallible human, if your ego can handle it, then I find it works well.

And, best of all, there is no need to speak on a podcast or to have a website.

  1. Again, possibly undermining my argument, I do write blogs — hello! — and have spoken at conferences. I’ve never appeared on a podcast, though! ↩︎

  2. I said I wasn’t advocating podcasting or blogging, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t if it’s the best way of sharing the information. ↩︎

Opinion

Twitter

Sometimes it’s only when you start writing about a subject that you truly understand your opinion. That’s the approach I’m taking to answering the question: are you going to leave Twitter?

A few people have asked me in the last couple of months and the only response I have is that I’m not jumping ship and closing my account immediately.

But as the weeks have progressed, as I’ve written this piece, my thinking has evolved. It’s not that I’m going to immediately close my account but I can see The End approaching. Indeed, my usage of Twitter has dropped considerably.

When Twitter was delisted from the stock market, the concept at the top of my mind was this: can you judge a company on the person or entity that owns it?

Twitter has been badly managed or owned by incredibly rich people (or both) for a long time, but they still have millions of users. Is a change of rich person really that significant?

Is the fact that Musk isn’t terribly likeable a factor? Many people bought products from Apple even though Jobs was famous for pushing people to breaking point. You can appreciate the vision even if you couldn’t work for the individual.

To be clear, I’m not saying that no-one avoided Twitter and Apple for these reasons. I’m sure there are some, but not me and not millions of others. Is there a line that he could cross where I would leave immediately? Yes, and, in fairness, he’s got pretty close by allowing back some of the extremists who have been banned.

And, circling back to the management, Twitter has been a mess pretty much since the beginning. They seem to have difficulty shipping anything. They’ve largely eliminated the “fail whale” but what big, beneficial features have come since? The algorithmic timeline?1

Like it or not, maybe the company needs shaking up.

Though, starting on the “cons” side, shaking up the company like this likely isn’t what is needed. It is the tech equivalent of the Brexit “solution” to Britain’s problems. Needing change isn’t the same as supporting chaos.

I don’t understand what over seven thousand people do at Twitter, but neither did Musk, hence the call going out to some of those laid off, asking for them to come back. More slash and burn than measure twice, cut once.

And Twitter’s considered approach to changes is out, replaced by arbitrary deadlines and hunches. $20 for Twitter Blue? No, how about $8. Available on Monday. Or Tuesday. Could be next week.

One common reason that people have left Twitter previously is the volume of hate and harassment. While I don’t doubt their experience, it’s not something that I’ve seen personally. I stay in my little bubble with tech and jokes and a bit of politics.

But it doesn’t feel like we’re heading in the right direction. Musk’s naive views on free speech are perhaps the most worrying, not in the sense that they have the most direct, immediate effect but because they demonstrate that he doesn’t Get It.

My hope is that Musk quickly learns and pivots to a more sensible, nuanced position. But his recent tweets about American politics and abandoning putting warnings on COVID misinformation makes me think this isn’t likely. He seems to think that the problems at Twitter are about the technology, that removing a few micro-services and adding a few blade servers will make a difference. However, the problems are all about people, those who use the platform, those who advertise on it, and those who work there. Until he understands that, or defers to someone who does, things will continue to spiral.

In the end, as an end user, Twitter is all about the people I interact with every day. If they leave, it doesn’t matter whether it’s because of something that Musk said or did, or not. Their absence will make the site not worth visiting any more.

In short, I stay on Twitter despite the company that runs it and despite the person who owns it. I’m there for the geeky discussions, the dad jokes and despairing at the state of British politics. If that goes away, so do I. Find me here if that happens.

  1. Most long-time Twitter users think it’s terrible. While it does occasionally surface interesting Tweets, I do think I’d prefer the original reverse chronological timeline, too. ↩︎

Blog

Reading 2022

I’ve been working from home for five years. I started well before the pandemic and, like many who have tried it, would have a hard time going back to an office full time. However, I used to spend my commute reading. In those years I have not managed to consistently find time to just sit and read.

What I’m saying is that 2022, from a book reading perspective, has gone not got well, even worse than 2021! I have only completed four books. I enjoyed two of them, the other two were a bit meh. Not actually bad but I wouldn’t say that they justified their word count.

Next year I am, possibly masochistically, sticking with a target of twelve books. I hope I can do better, even though history suggests I won’t. My backlog of reading material continues to grow and they are not going to read themselves.

At the same time, I am migrating from the Amazon-owned Good Reads to community-owned BookWyrm, which is federated like Mastodon. I’m here if you want to follow my progress.

Opinion

Programming Pearls

Every year I try to complete the Advent of Code. Every year I fail to finish. I get about halfway through, and the exercises start taking longer to complete than I have time.

Every year I think about Jon Bentley’s Programming Pearls1, because the same kinds of challenges you find in Advent of Code can be found in the book. The main difference being the quality of the answers. At least in my case2. In the words of the preface: “Programming pearls whose origins lie beyond solid engineering, in the realm of insight and creativity.”

The format of the book involves presenting a programming problem and then iterating on the solution while discussing the trade-offs involved at each step. It’s quite an old book by computing standards – the second edition was published in 1999 – and you may be put off by the use of C to illustrate the solutions. I would urge you to continue anyway, even if you are not an expert in C. You may also find some of the solutions to be hard work. Honestly, that’s part of the fun. If you don’t like having your brain turned inside out, this isn’t the book for you!

As you work your way through the chapters, you realise that the key for most of them is not esoteric optimisations or low-level hacking made possible by the C programming language. Instead, it’s data structures. If you somehow manage to store your data in the “correct” way, the algorithm to process it becomes simpler, clearer and faster. It’s almost miraculous.

Of course, there’s a lively debate about “computer science” and whether it should be the subject of developer interviews. What I would say is that the kinds of people who like to attempt Advent of Code are very likely the kind of people who will also enjoy Programming Pearls.

  1. Not to be confused with Programming Perl. ↩︎
  2. In my defence, I usually use Advent of Code to learn (or brush up on) a new programming language rather than solve the puzzle in the best way. That’s my excuse, and I’m sticking to it. ↩︎
Blog

Facts and Fallacies of Software Engineering

I’ll be honest: I wanted to like “Facts and Fallacies of Software Engineering” by Robert L. Glass more than I did. I’m not sure if it’s dated badly — it’s from 2002 — or I was in the wrong frame of mind, or something else, but it just didn’t work for me.

The book is structured as a list of facts grouped around areas such as “Management” and “Requirements.” For each fact, there is a discussion, the controversy, and then the sources and references. The writing aims to be friendly, but I found it a bit grating1.

Going back through the fifty-five facts and fallacies, I find that I agree with the majority of them2. Twenty years on from the original version, I suspect that some are less controversial than when it was originally published. There is some degree of (justified) scepticism about the newfangled “agile” process, which is now largely standard across the industry. Yet it’s also reassuring how little other things have changed. There is still little transfer between academia and industry. Quality continues to be a hot-button topic. And software maintenance rarely gets the love it deserves.

I’ve seen this book described as a classic, so maybe I’m missing something. There are many books I would suggest you read first. In the end, I didn’t like the writing, and I think that there are too few original insights in too many words.

  1. This is such a subjective thing. I think the objective in was modesty or self-deprecation, but it came across as boasting. ↩︎
  2. I’m resisting the temptation to argue against those that I don’t agree with. ↩︎
Opinion

Panic

The whole team got this email today. Okay, it wasn’t today and these are not the exact words, but it was something like this:

We have a serious regression in build 456. We have set the project back rather than taken it forward. We need the utmost focus and commitment on fixing it. We’ve broken it and we stay in the office until it’s fixed.

I’ve had a few of those messages over the years and while it’s intended to focus minds it often has the opposite effect. Let’s examine why.

Projects see the same mistakes made over and over and this email encompasses many of those sins; it’s one message but represents a microcosm of large part of my career.

Here are a few problems that I see immediately:

  • No problem definition
  • No person accountable
  • No next action
  • A deadline but no understanding of the work involved

This has a number of consequences.

There are studies that show if you have a heart attack in a crowded area you are less likely to receive life-saving CPR from a stranger than if you’re in an area with one other person.

In this case the passers by (the project team) don’t know that they’re needed. Without a problem definition I don’t know if the regression was caused by one of my changes or even if it affects my code. Without a person accountable everyone likely assumes that it’s someone else’s code. “Someone would have mentioned it if it was my code.” And with no “next action” it’s easy to assume that someone else will handle it.

Arguably the deadline is not really a deadline. What if the fix would take a week to implement? Instead it’s a target. You can’t take an estimate and reduce it to fit to an externally imposed date. It doesn’t work like that. You may hit your deadline if you’re lucky, but a good plan doesn’t need luck.

Even worse, the arbitrary deadline and lack of direction gives the entire project a sense of panic. I think the intention was urgency but urgency implies you know what you need to do and that you need to do it quickly. As we’ve seen, the task above is neither well defined nor assigned. The only clear things in the original email are the version that is broken and the deadline.

However, the biggest sin is questioning the commitment and competence of the people needed to resolve the issue. In my experience, this is rarely the case, yet asking the question can make it true. If you’re not trusted, why put in the extra work? Next time you need to make a change, are you going to do it the “right” way or the way with the absolute lowest risk? Putting in a lot of good work and then getting kicked for your efforts is not a good incentive for doing a job well.