Comments for Sarah Mei http://www.sarahmei.com/blog Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:25:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 Comment on Safe Facebooking by dietcoupon http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2010/07/25/safe-facebooking/comment-page-1/#comment-322 dietcoupon Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:25:56 +0000 http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/?p=554#comment-322 Very intriguing, and worth thinking about, but the first step is to keep the sensitive content off of Facebook, no? Mine doesn't have any noteworthy information about me - not even my primary e-mail address. My other issue is that I don't like Facebook and I don't like using it, but your points about maintaining contact are valid and ultimately why I keep my account. Still, to quarantine it to another browser reinforces the "need" to use Facebook by making it a more complicated process. Do you find that this process emphasizes or de-emphasizes the compulsive Facbook-check? Very intriguing, and worth thinking about, but the first step is to keep the sensitive content off of Facebook, no? Mine doesn’t have any noteworthy information about me – not even my primary e-mail address.

My other issue is that I don’t like Facebook and I don’t like using it, but your points about maintaining contact are valid and ultimately why I keep my account. Still, to quarantine it to another browser reinforces the “need” to use Facebook by making it a more complicated process. Do you find that this process emphasizes or de-emphasizes the compulsive Facbook-check?

]]> Comment on Safe Facebooking by Andrea http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2010/07/25/safe-facebooking/comment-page-1/#comment-321 Andrea Mon, 26 Jul 2010 07:02:19 +0000 http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/?p=554#comment-321 I've been having some thoughts along the same lines. At the moment I use Facebook only via the dedicated Facebook app on my iPod touch. There is a way to use Firefox both with Facebook and with other websites: you can create different Firefox profiles. You can run several different Firefox profiles at the same time using the -no-remote flag. The MozillaZine Knowledge Base has some information about this: http://kb.mozillazine.org/Using_multiple_profiles_-_Firefox and http://kb.mozillazine.org/Opening_a_new_instance_of_Firefox_with_another_profile I’ve been having some thoughts along the same lines. At the moment I use Facebook only via the dedicated Facebook app on my iPod touch.

There is a way to use Firefox both with Facebook and with other websites: you can create different Firefox profiles. You can run several different Firefox profiles at the same time using the -no-remote flag. The MozillaZine Knowledge Base has some information about this: http://kb.mozillazine.org/Using_multiple_profiles_-_Firefox and http://kb.mozillazine.org/Opening_a_new_instance_of_Firefox_with_another_profile

]]> Comment on Outside-In BDD: How?! by Pedro http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2010/05/29/outside-in-bdd/comment-page-1/#comment-318 Pedro Mon, 19 Jul 2010 22:48:35 +0000 http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/?p=443#comment-318 Great post! Regarding what to test, I find myself testing the controllers less frequently, as I'm using Jose Valim's inherited_resources's gem. I only test the actions I need to override. But other than that, very useful information. Great post! Regarding what to test, I find myself testing the controllers less frequently, as I’m using Jose Valim’s inherited_resources’s gem. I only test the actions I need to override. But other than that, very useful information.

]]> Comment on Teaching Ruby to High School Girls by samsung ln40c630 http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2009/08/15/teaching-ruby-to-high-school-girls/comment-page-1/#comment-315 samsung ln40c630 Sat, 17 Jul 2010 00:32:37 +0000 http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/?p=195#comment-315 You really talked it out in layman terms. That is a real art, not many developers can simplify it down to people that get completely lost when the word “code” is said. You really talked it out in layman terms. That is a real art, not many developers can simplify it down to people that get completely lost when the word “code” is said.

]]> Comment on Thoughts on two months of pairing by Curious Cat Management Improvement Blog » Management Improvement Carnival #102 http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2010/04/14/thoughts-on-two-months-of-pairing/comment-page-1/#comment-302 Curious Cat Management Improvement Blog » Management Improvement Carnival #102 Thu, 01 Jul 2010 12:36:51 +0000 http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/?p=343#comment-302 [...] Thoughts on two months of pairing by Sarah Mei – “I don’t take shortcuts. I write the tests first. I refactor code that needs it. I focus on doing the simplest thing that could possibly work, without being sloppy. I make sure I understand what I’m doing before I do it.” [...] [...] Thoughts on two months of pairing by Sarah Mei – “I don’t take shortcuts. I write the tests first. I refactor code that needs it. I focus on doing the simplest thing that could possibly work, without being sloppy. I make sure I understand what I’m doing before I do it.” [...]

]]> Comment on RailsConf Slides – Beyond (No)SQL by Brandon Zylstra http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2010/06/09/railsconf-slides/comment-page-1/#comment-300 Brandon Zylstra Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:27:16 +0000 http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/?p=544#comment-300 Nice, but I think you made a mistake on slide 86. CouchDB should be on the BASE side of things, as it values availability and accepts eventual consistency. Nice, but I think you made a mistake on slide 86. CouchDB should be on the BASE side of things, as it values availability and accepts eventual consistency.

]]> Comment on Thoughts on two months of pairing by AgileBill Krebs http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2010/04/14/thoughts-on-two-months-of-pairing/comment-page-1/#comment-298 AgileBill Krebs Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:09:08 +0000 http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/?p=343#comment-298 That is so true about focus. A lot of the benefits to pairing are intangible. Focus. Gradual dissemination of knowledge about the team as we rotate pairs - not just about the code, but about tools. You make a good point about how helpful it is to have a pair partner there to remind you to do TDD etc. ...AgileBill4d That is so true about focus. A lot of the benefits to pairing are intangible. Focus. Gradual dissemination of knowledge about the team as we rotate pairs – not just about the code, but about tools. You make a good point about how helpful it is to have a pair partner there to remind you to do TDD etc. …AgileBill4d

]]> Comment on Outside-In BDD: How?! by Dave Ott http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2010/05/29/outside-in-bdd/comment-page-1/#comment-297 Dave Ott Wed, 23 Jun 2010 22:05:49 +0000 http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/?p=443#comment-297 Great to see someone explain this process in a detailed manner. We've really started shying away from controller tests at Hashrocket on the whole. Mainly because if you need them then you're controller is doing too much (the controller in this post definitely doesn't do too much). We've adopted a method of exposing resources from a controller using a gem written by a colleague called decent_exposure. It eliminates the need for instance variables in controllers thereby tidying them up even further (ex: expose(:book) { Book.new(params[:book]) }). So a typical controller only has create, update, and destroy and those actions only handle their one responsibility and then redirect. So this one responsibility is really covered in the cucumber integration test. We've also been loving the excellent capybara gem lately for testing javascript operations in our integration tests. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy to watch the cucumber suite run in selenium mode. Also agree with Anthony, should is redundant. When you're reading the english output from rspec #create: creates a book or redirects back to the book list is much nicer. These are picky things about an awesome post. Thanks for sharing this! Great to see someone explain this process in a detailed manner. We’ve really started shying away from controller tests at Hashrocket on the whole. Mainly because if you need them then you’re controller is doing too much (the controller in this post definitely doesn’t do too much). We’ve adopted a method of exposing resources from a controller using a gem written by a colleague called decent_exposure. It eliminates the need for instance variables in controllers thereby tidying them up even further (ex: expose(:book) { Book.new(params[:book]) }). So a typical controller only has create, update, and destroy and those actions only handle their one responsibility and then redirect. So this one responsibility is really covered in the cucumber integration test.

We’ve also been loving the excellent capybara gem lately for testing javascript operations in our integration tests. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy to watch the cucumber suite run in selenium mode.

Also agree with Anthony, should is redundant. When you’re reading the english output from rspec #create: creates a book or redirects back to the book list is much nicer. These are picky things about an awesome post. Thanks for sharing this!

]]> Comment on Thoughts on two months of pairing by M http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2010/04/14/thoughts-on-two-months-of-pairing/comment-page-1/#comment-296 M Wed, 23 Jun 2010 15:34:25 +0000 http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/?p=343#comment-296 I think pair programming is a combination of getting rid of your bad habits solo and having two minds working on the same problem. It certainly doesn't amplify productivity but it makes each party more productive. Re: The section on the 9-to-5er... I know tons of people in all sorts of fields who keep their work at work. And you know what? They're totally awesome at their jobs. Just because you don't like to bring work home, and you don't spend your days and nights coding and reading tech blogs doesn't mean you're not excellent at what you do. And anyone who feels superior because they spend their days doing just that should probably take a reality check and then take a break every once in a while and see there's more to life than that. I think pair programming is a combination of getting rid of your bad habits solo and having two minds working on the same problem. It certainly doesn’t amplify productivity but it makes each party more productive.

Re: The section on the 9-to-5er… I know tons of people in all sorts of fields who keep their work at work. And you know what? They’re totally awesome at their jobs. Just because you don’t like to bring work home, and you don’t spend your days and nights coding and reading tech blogs doesn’t mean you’re not excellent at what you do. And anyone who feels superior because they spend their days doing just that should probably take a reality check and then take a break every once in a while and see there’s more to life than that.

]]> Comment on Thoughts on two months of pairing by Tim Lesher http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2010/04/14/thoughts-on-two-months-of-pairing/comment-page-1/#comment-295 Tim Lesher Tue, 22 Jun 2010 16:49:04 +0000 http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/?p=343#comment-295 <i>I often hear programmers – mostly young, mostly single – talk disparagingly about “commodity programmers.” They usually mean people who program at work but spend their free time on other stuff, and aren’t really interested in tech.</i> I think we have similar but different definitions of "commodity programmers". To me, and in other places I've heard it, it refers to programmers who treat their work as generating programs in return for pay, and nothing more. That does tend to exclude the folks who have a personal interest in programming and do it in their free time, but that's not the main criterion. The key feature of a "commodity programmer" is a lack of interest in either advancing the state of their craft, or advancing their own skills, other than as a means to find a better place to assemble widgets in return for pay. Literally, commodity programmers view their work as a commodity to be produced in order to get paid. So while the folks who program both as a job and as a hobby are rarely commodity programmers by this definition, there are plenty of non-commodity programmers who don't practice total tech immersion. I often hear programmers – mostly young, mostly single – talk disparagingly about “commodity programmers.” They usually mean people who program at work but spend their free time on other stuff, and aren’t really interested in tech.

I think we have similar but different definitions of “commodity programmers”.

To me, and in other places I’ve heard it, it refers to programmers who treat their work as generating programs in return for pay, and nothing more. That does tend to exclude the folks who have a personal interest in programming and do it in their free time, but that’s not the main criterion.

The key feature of a “commodity programmer” is a lack of interest in either advancing the state of their craft, or advancing their own skills, other than as a means to find a better place to assemble widgets in return for pay. Literally, commodity programmers view their work as a commodity to be produced in order to get paid.

So while the folks who program both as a job and as a hobby are rarely commodity programmers by this definition, there are plenty of non-commodity programmers who don’t practice total tech immersion.

]]>