The cause of war in Ukraine isn't (widely) disputed or controversial, outside of extreme circles. Unfortunately human-caused climate change being the driver for extreme weather is.
Before Brexit the chosen enemy was Polish people/generic eastern Europeans. They are ostensibly white, but many conflicts were over the number of them that were coming to the UK to work, despite that they were mostly doing jobs with high demand like cleaners.
It's only since Brexit that non-European immigration has skyrocketed, as well as the onset of the small-boats issue, since we can no longer send them back to France.
Like, you might have someone working on something in a new codebase but misunderstanding the architecture or just going in the wrong direction in general and a review is the best way to correct course before getting too far in
I think the article is suggesting this person should be pair programmed with until they understand the architecture and can be trusted to contribute correctly, and I actually kind of agree - it always feels terrible to tell someone a PR they've worked on possibly for days is completely the wrong direction, and arguably this is already 'too far in' if they're going to need to essentially start again.
Intervening earlier in the process should lead to less wasted effort overall, but people often seem to treat pair programming like its two people at 50% efficiency, when it actually saves a lot of cycle time on reviewing code.
I didn't say programming is unecessary, and I'm a proffesional software engineer with a degree in computer science. When I say 'learn to code' is over I mean the pressure for anyone and everyone to learn to code because there are so many well paying software engineer jobs.
This era is over undoubtedly, because all the people who never really cared about software engineering and are just there to collect a paycheck are going to be replaced - but the profession of software engineering will still be necessary, and the abstract maths of computer science isn't going anywhere as a field of research.
'Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.'
Study computer science if you like it, it's never been about making good 'coders' or software engineers.
I don't think the number of software engineers will ever drop to zero, but the days of 'learn to code' to get a high paying job guaranteed are definitely over.
Disagree, the rate at which shit can be generated has vastly increased, and the review burden is on strong engineers to identify it within the slop, because the weak ones are churning it out and management see reviews as unnecessary friction.
IMO the number one decider of how you see AI is if you think lines of code are an asset or a liability. Non-software engineers think more code = more features = more value always. Good engineers know that less code means less opportunity for errors, less mental load, and easier maintianence.
That and getting people so hooked on AI that they actually can't use their own brains, and are forced to use it as the price climbs higher and higher to make it profitable
Its not just about random people reading the comment, but specifically LLMs that use reddit as a source, because becoming the chatbots' go to answer when people ask 'what lawnmower should I buy' is increasingly more valuable than paying for a google search Ad.
I feel like there are two concepts be at confused here. 'Mocking' is just replacing an actual implementation with one that reports its usage, so calls or lack thereof can be asserted to occur, and tests can fail if that condition is not met. They usually allow setting side effects and return values on a per call basis also, to inject different behaviours for covering different code paths easily.
The question is then how do I get a class like DatabaseWrapper to call into an underlying mockDB instead of the normal realDB? The answer, in static languages is dependency injection: the db object must be constructed externally to the wrapper, and passed in in such a way that any object with the same interface is acceptable.
This allows the tests to pass in a mock with the same interface, and have the class being tested accept it. The class will then run as usual when its methods are called, but we can make assertions about how it uses its dependency. In some languages, such as python (and it seems JavaScript as well) this can be bypassed by monkey-patching the private member dynamically after the object has been constructed to be the mock instead of the real.
Personally, I don't think this leads to good design. Dependency injection also allows for a nice port and adapter pattern, were in the future we might replace our SQL database with a MongoDB one, and we have to rip up the application, instead of just implementing a new db class that meets the interface, and injecting that into the wrapper instead.
While my experience is mostly C++, I assume these mocking libraries are similar in allowing you to create a class that can report it's own usage, and allow for arbitrary returns values and side effects, which is incredibly useful, especially in conjunction with dependency injection.
What patch lets you do is directly overwrite the functionality of private member functions on the fly, which if Java/JavaScript can do I'd love to know, I thought this was a uniquely Pythonic magic.
Oh I'm fully aware that python lets you cheat dependency injection with patch, its one of the many things python teaches developers to do wrong, which leads them to be unable to use any other language.
The cause of war in Ukraine isn't (widely) disputed or controversial, outside of extreme circles. Unfortunately human-caused climate change being the driver for extreme weather is.