我正在对初级(也许是高级)软件工程师所犯的常见错误和错误假设进行一些研究。
你坚持时间最长、最终被纠正的假设是什么?
例如,我误解了整数的大小不是标准的,而是取决于语言和目标。说起来有点尴尬,但事实就是这样。
坦率地说;你有什么坚定的信念?你大概坚持了多长时间?它可以是关于一种算法、一种语言、一个编程概念、测试,或者任何关于编程、编程语言或计算机科学的东西。
我正在对初级(也许是高级)软件工程师所犯的常见错误和错误假设进行一些研究。
你坚持时间最长、最终被纠正的假设是什么?
例如,我误解了整数的大小不是标准的,而是取决于语言和目标。说起来有点尴尬,但事实就是这样。
坦率地说;你有什么坚定的信念?你大概坚持了多长时间?它可以是关于一种算法、一种语言、一个编程概念、测试,或者任何关于编程、编程语言或计算机科学的东西。
当前回答
我曾经认为ie6的盒子模式是微软为了破坏与其他浏览器的兼容性而想出的一个邪恶的愚蠢想法。
大量的csing使我相信它更符合逻辑,并且可以使页面设计维护(更改块填充/边框/页边距)更容易。
想想现实世界:改变A4页面的边框宽度并不会改变页面宽度,只会减少内容的空间。
其他回答
My co-workers were/are producing supposedly bad code because they sucked/suck. It took me a while to learn that I should first check what really happened. Most of the times, bad code was caused by lack of management, customers who didn't want to check what they really wanted and started changing their minds like there's no tomorrow, or other circunstances out of anyone's control, like economic crysis. Customers demand "for yesterday" features because they are stupid: Not really. It's about communication. If someone tells them it everything can really be done in 1 week, guess what? they'll want it in 1 week. "Never change code that works". This is not a good thing IMO. You obviously don't have to change what's really working. However, if you never change a piece of code because it's supposedly working and it's too complex to change, you may end up finding out that code isn't really doing what it's supposed to do. Eg: I've seen a sales commission calculation software doing wrong calculations for two years because nobody wanted to maintain the software. Nobody at sales knew about it. The formula was so complex they didn't really know how to check the numbers.
我是一个优秀的程序员!
总是没有足够的时间在最后期限前完成。
人们实际上关心所使用的技术(开源/闭源)。
代码行数越多,软件就越好。