- 0 Posts
- 27 Comments
I disagree unless the tests are reasonably high level.
Half the time the thing you’re testing is so poorly defined that the only way to tighten that definition is to iterate.
In this sense, you’re wasting time writing tests until you’ve iterated enough to have something worth testing.
At that point, a couple of regression tests offer the biggest bang for buck so you can sanity check things are still working when you move on to another function and forget all about this one
Teams is relative.
At a previous job (Microsoft shop but in the public sector so 10 years behind), the standard messenger when I started was Skype for Business.
In case you’ve never used Skype for Business, it’s “Skype” in branding only and actually has nothing to do with the Skype software that Microsoft purchased and is more like MSN Messenger.
Compared to that, Teams is a huge step up.
Also, at a Microsoft shop, you have to use what Microsoft provides even though it’s usually balls.
It’s 90% of the reason I now refuse to work anywhere that’s bought into the Microsoft ecosystem. It’s just so… mediocre
Err, no? At what point did I claim to be an expert?
It doesn’t take a genius to realise that serving 100-record chunks of a billion record dataset using limit 100 offset 582760200 is never gonna perform well
Or that converting indexed time columns to strings and doing string comparisons on them makes every query perform an entire table scan, which is obvious if you actually take the time to look at the query plan (spoiler: they don’t)
“Why can’t the system handle more than 2 queries per second? This database sucks”
Why is it that security guys always think their issues are more important than any other issues?
Like well done you, you ran an automated tool over the codebase and it picked up some outdated dependencies.
We cant just update these dependencies because the newer versions have breaking changes and we already have a backlog of 32767 issues to deal with.
It’s not security debt, it’s just general technical debt.
Why is the issue that is only exploitable in a contorted scenario where the user has broken out of a VM and gained root on the hypervisor more important than the issue preventing our largest customer from tripling their volume on our platform?
Not to mention the joke that’s been made of the CVE system due to resume padding by the security industry…
Just think of it as a routing optimisation that is only relevant for ipv4 networks.
Router simple, router need to make decisions quick, quickest decision is made when can smush the subnet mask against an IP address and determine if the computer is on a local network so router can send traffic direct or is on other network so router needs to send traffic to other router
And then managers go “why does shadow IT exist?”