Learner100

In those situations, the more productive option to course-correct is to talk to the change author in a meeting/chat instead of just volleying off a tsunami of comments about various minutiae in the change IMO.

> When you receive a review with a hundred comments, it’s very hard to engage with that review on anything other than a trivial level.

Wow, that seems crazy. I can only hope I never have to work with somebody who thinks it is productive to leave that many comments on a change -- I genuinely cannot imagine any change that could ever require that.

Great article, fully agree with all the points.

A design philosophy called "Progressive Disclosure" tries to tackle this problem, where a tool is supposed to present a minimal set of functionality initially to allow a user to be productive without being an expert and progressively "reveal" more complex features as the user becomes more familiar with the tool and attempts to do more complex things.

I've heard the programming language Swift followed this philosophy during development, though I've never written any Swift code to know how well it worked out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_disclosure

For most self help / productivity books, I agree pretty strongly with this take. A lot of those types of books (Atomic Habits, Getting Things Done, Measure What Matters as some examples) often feel like they could have been reduced to a blog post, or series of blog posts at most. They were good books, but I did feel like there there was some padding to slog through in each chapter.

Usually, the point is communicated fairly quickly a few paragraphs into the chapter and then belaboured for pages with one or two anecdotes that don’t lend much more weight to the strength/validity of the point for me.

Ah, thanks!

- The SMTP client they implemented could insert a newline such that a line was comprised of only a single period.

- The SMTP client spec says that an additional period would be added here.

- The SMTP server spec says that it would remove this additional period, bringing us back to one period.

I don’t get how this led to there being no period at all. Am I missing something?

> While not traditional TDD or likely not a new concept, I’ve done something I’ve dubbed TLD (Test Led Development). Rather than writing a whole smattering of tests and then coding until they all pass, TLD focuses on ping-ponging between test and code.

TDD commonly gets mischaracterized as a two-step process of writing a suite of tests upfront, then writing some implementation to make them all pass. It's actually much closer to what is described as TLD in the post. You write a failing test, do the bare minimum to make it pass, refactor if appropriate and start the cycle again. It's a development process that will (in theory) produce a high quality implementation and suite of tests at the end.