Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 12 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm a new graduate and yave just started working a few weeks past as a web programmer. I've kind of been thrown in at the deepend and have been put straight on a project that appears on the face of it to be relatively simple, but there a lot of little intricacies that are making it quite difficult.
What sort of work rate will employers be expecting a new graduate to work at? My employer hasn't said anything but I feel like I am taking much longer than they anticipated - perhaps even regretting that the have employed me in the first place. Also, I am asking for help with logic and some best ways to tackle some problems and I also feel they think I should know more than I should. Again what would an employer be expecting from the level of a recent graduate.
I want to be as good as I can and learn as much as possible but I constantly feel under pressure as I keep thinkin I should be getting through mug more work than I currently am. Is this a common feeling in new programmers and how would my employer approach it if I wasn't performing up to their expectations. Like I said, nothing had been mentioned but I do feel they are wondering why they bothered to hire me.
Some advice on this from experienced developers would be great.
"Rate" is a hard thing to quantify when talking about software - as you note, some simple things aren't easy, and some complicated things aren't hard. In general, the most important thing is to communicate with your employer. You may be afraid to talk about the problems, but it's much easier to talk about them now than to keep your mouth shut and only announce problems when your project is due.
Related
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I am not sure if the question fits SO's guidelines, but I would like to know if there is a specific situation where I can use micro-frameworks. Going by the nomenclature, it's suitable for small projects. But we can never tell if a project, which is small in nature at the moments, won't grow large later. Does this mean we can use micro-frameworks only for REST APIs and stuff (which are almost always smaller part of a large project) ?
It really depends mostly on your needs. If I want to create something that takes few hours and it's more or less just "Hello world" with some spice, I use Silex. If I need something even slightly bigger, I grab Symfony2 and spend next hour configuring it (just because it's probably worth spending more time on it). But it'd be naive to think it's as simple. I know people that roll bigger frameworks even for the tiniest projects, just because they can one day grow. Other people do them in micro-frameworks and just rewrite them if they need to. Just sit with your team and write down pros and cons of using micro-framework in given situation, that should work the best.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
This is not a technical question but more to managing technical expectation to myself. Currently i am just along managing website (WP based), managing web services, do some web development works in this company. Some projects i need to outsource, manage the outsourcing until the project is complete. I am not a powerful PHP developer (i just have the basics), but i love Wordpress, so most of the project i use WP as the platform.
Even i am alone, i am quite happy because my work more to managing than doing the hard coding. But the time has come i need to grow this team, i have found skillful developer and designer to join my team. They are very skillful, have great portfolios.
My boss want me to find a great team so my team can grow. My dilemma now is i am afraid if i approve the new candidates to my team than maybe i will be removed from the team sooner or later since i am not skillful as them, even i am more senior than them in this company.
On the other hand, i heard it is great to work with more skillful person as you can develop yourself faster.
Now i am stuck which way to choose.
A good Project Manager has a different skill set than a good Developer. If you're better at keeping things organized, delegating tasks, and making sure tasks get done, then you'll be a fine PM. Developers like to have PM's who are developers, so that we don't have to explain the issues of programming.
It also makes good business sense to move someone in your position to a post where you wont be slowing down the progress of the project by mediocre programming skills; Instead, you'd be improving projects by keeping the communication channels open, and making sure each part gets taken care of.
Additionally, you might want to focus on your debugging skills so that you can help sort out code issues when a developer gets stuck. Simply acting as a sounding board is often enough to help most developers work through their problems.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 11 years ago.
Improve this question
I am about to build the backend for my startup, which will be mainly offering a REST service, but HTML content will become available later. I am an experienced PHP developer and was thinking about building it in PHP first, but many people try to convince me to switch to Ruby. I would love to, but I have the following concerns:
I want to create a prototype quickly, learning a new language costs me a lot of time.
Right now I do not have a second developer who has Ruby expertise, so if I am stuck searching for a bug somewhere, it is worse than being stuck in PHP, where I know a bunch of people to get assistance from.
Some of the arguments people are making in favor of Ruby are:
It is easy to find good developers for Ruby, because the language itself is a filter.
Using a framework like Sinatra would speed up my development time drastically
Ruby is fun
What would you do?
The questions are :
do you prefer fun, or efficiency ?
do you have time to wait before being efficient ?
why not just recruit a good php developer ?
Even if there are bad developers on the market, there are also good developers
And I should add it's not that hard to see if a developer is good or not.
you say language is a filter ; don't you think it'll be enough of a filter to just make things hard when it comes to finding a ruby developer ?
If you're betting your money on this startup, take the road that you know. Getting to market quickly and having a support structure may be a lot more important than switching to a fun language.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm new to PHP and am trying to more of an overview before I jump into the code sometime tomorrow.
What advantage does using a framework like CodeIgniter or CakePHP or Zend provide over using 'plain vanilla' PHP?
The framework takes care of the stuff that everyone's done a hundred times - authenticating users, talking to databases, handling file uploads, validating forms.
It saves you time, because you don't have to write it again.
It saves you headaches, because it's probably designed better than you would off the cuff and because it's already been thoroughly debugged.
It makes it easier to collaborate, because anyone who knows the framework has a step up on understanding your program.
It makes programming more fun, because you can focus on writing the interesting bits, not the slugwork.
Any framework has the advantage of solving problems that just about any programmer would encounter without using a framework.
There are many common problems that you and I would face regardless of whether or not we're building software for banking, media, news, etc, and instead of reinventing the wheel, you can springboard off of the hundreds and thousands of hours of developer experience by using code that has been tried and tested in a multitude of different production environments.
The motto is this: Don't reinvent the wheel. Your job is to meet a business goal, not solve problems that other people have already solved for you.
One advantage is: Design decisions are made for you.
One disadvantage is: Design decisions are made for you.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 12 years ago.
Improve this question
As a developer, I've learned a heck of a lot from the global community and I believe like any community, you need to participate and contribute.
I've worked on several small projects that I want to offer up for free, but I want them to actually be used.
For the sincerity of this post, I am not going to promote them here.
What are some good ways to offer a free resource like a widget that does x,y, and z, for free. With an honest-to-god intent to just contribute?
Assuming it's open source, add to freshmeat for example to help people find it.
Write really good documentation, with examples etc. There's load of code out there which is lacking documentation making it pretty useless no matter how good the code is.
Make it easy for people to report bugs, suggest features, etc.
make a screencast showing how you made the software - other programmers will watch the video and may in-turn blog about it
i'm sure you'll get better suggestions than that though, good luck