Slashdot Mirror
Same Dev Tools/Language/Framework For Everyone?
AC writes "Upper management of the company I work at recently declared that all new development should be done with a single combination of development tools, language, and framework. The main rationale is that people can be relocated from one group / project to another faster, because they don't need to learn a new environment when they switch. Of course the chosen language / framework used by everybody does not need to be the best tool for the job, but it should be good enough to allow every project to get done. What does Slashdot think about this? Is it OK to use the same development tools and language for every project, instead of choosing what fits best? Will the time saved be sufficient to offset the time lost to the 'not the best tool for the job' environment developers will be forced to use?"
The only thing worse for it is hiring "managment consultants" to "streamline" the process.
Well-well look. I already told you: I deal with the god damn customers so the engineers don't have to. I have people skills; I am good at dealing with people. Can't you understand that? What the hell is wrong with you people?
So you have tried emacs too huh.
If it's big enough you can rely on picking the right tool for the job... developers simply chose the tool and compete based on who can implement the software best measured by customer satisfaction reports, rather than bugs or performance. Rather than directing outcomes we foster a system based on evolutionary theory. Developers are pitted against each other, and the weak developers get stabbed or maybe scalped. The Head Developer wears a necklace of threaded ears and walks around the office taking his share of the women and of food and clothing. Every night a fire burns and the drum beat calls developers out to compete for their very lives. Generations later Alpha developers will rise to feast on their flesh, crush our enemies, see them driven before us, and we will hear the lamentations of their women.
This will really only work at large companys though :(
ps. Hi gordon in #jelliffefans...bring your A game!If someone is good at something, ferchrissake KEEP THEM THERE!
I see that finishing a project appears to be a foreign concept to you.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Sure, and while they're at it, let's give all the mechanics just one size of wrench and screwdriver.
I am so sick of this analogy, as it's completely inaccurate. Programming languages, at least full featured languages, are a whole set of tools, not a single tool. Comparing Java to C is more like comparing Craftsman to Snap-on, different brands of tools but they can both be used to do the same thing. If you can give you mechanics a single tool that can be used in all their tasks, like a sonic screwdriver, then do it. If the language isn't full featured, or cover all your needs, then don't use it.
And conversely, each project team should be free to evaluate the best tools to get each job done.
This is exactly what you need to do if you want to guarantee that you have to continue with the team you have or hiring nothing but experienced senior developers. Keep the number of tools simple and you can have a small number of leads and many interns to do the same amount of work with a much higher over all quality and considerably less cost.
If anyone thinks that limiting a computer scientist's choice of tools is a good idea, you should kick that manager to the curb.
If anyone thinks that hiring computer scientist's to do anything other than research and theory is a good idea, you should kick that manager to the curb.
He works for Google.
Or some excel printouts, with graphs. Vaguely scribble and circle bits of them at random. And make it so the lines are always trending up.
At the bottom of the
Bad analogy (no cars). It's more of the case of Ferraris, Hummers, Monster Trucks, and Volkswagon Beetles with tires.
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are cruchy and good with ketchup.