To be full and not be them
I am exactly the 40+ year old single-piece that was mentioned in the sensational article . When I see a task where the backender mentions dTo, to which I need to write a binding on the front ... I am scheduled to lose my temper. First, I work well when angry. And here is a case. And secondly (and this is the main thing), I don’t want to know what DeTeO is, where it lies and how to work with it. I need only the path, method, parameters, and a set of answers. In terms of HTTP / REST. I do not want to go into the back code. I do not even want to guess that based on the name of the dTo class, you can easily calculate the path.
This is a matter of respect. I do not climb into the back kitchen. And when I put the task on the back, I clearly paint the interface (again in REST terms) and briefly describe why I need it and how I intend to use it. How it is implemented on the back is not my business, how I implement the work of the front and where I will place the buttons - not them.
Do you already understand what the article is about? So - a little about that. I work as a single. But actually, I'm a multistek. Moreover, he worked and gave the result to the seigneur and team lid in the front, back-up, full-stack, system and even business analysis. And I am glad that I have such a background.
')
What is good in it, and how I came to this under the cut.
Go.
In many articles, I immediately Feil intrigue. I put the conclusions at the beginning of the article, and then open the topic, with explanations, examples, jokes and trolling. Especially when the conclusions are contradictory, and the explanations are shaky. I see no reason not to save someone time here.
I believe that, if possible, it is worthwhile to work in several areas. Especially in youth, when the brains are not killed, and there is no responsibility to the family and children. Moreover, when changing the stasis you almost never lose in salary, and in the long run you win.
PS I write mostly about seniors, but everything can be brought down a step below (I have little experience with middle work).
Pps. I use the terms technology and platform (as synonyms) for a programming language and / or framework. It is not by chance in the context of the article. "Deep knowledge of the language" is often nothing, in front of a deep and practical knowledge of libraries (perhaps, if you do not take LISP / Hackel or C ++ with perversions). Therefore, let's say Python + Hadoop, Python + CV and Python + ML are different technologies / platforms for my taste. Of course, often people who have knowledge in computer vision are at least interested in machine learning, and even distributed computing. But ... to become a great expert on these three platforms, it is not enough to be a specialist on one.
So.
Any technology lives on average 5 years * ( * Author's fantasies ). Then either it is superseded by something else. Either the technology moves to version 2.0, declaratively ideologically compatible with the previous one, and not really ...
In fact, you have to learn again. Moreover: you have to break yourself, give up comfortable developments and familiar logic. It hurts, hard and freaking out. When a simple task (in version 1.0), in version 2.0 it requires hellish crutches and a ton of code. Then, of course, you discover that the task could be solved more than simply. Easier than 1.0. Just not like I used to.
In any case, there is a five-year cycle for which knowledge and best practices are worthless. Therefore, in the development constantly have to learn. Run to stay in place, as well as Alice in Wonderland. He stopped, fell behind and demand falls.
And what a shame that we have to learn jerks. You sit for yourself, kodish without rozdychu, you work out tricks, you learn subtle features and "standard khaki." And there ... times! A new version. And half of the knowledge is no longer needed by potential employers. And this means that it will be difficult to build a conversation with your employer, starting with: “this is the situation on the market here ...”
For it will be a pure bluff. After all, in the current work, they continue to successfully and actively use the once-hype platform. Which gradually becomes a mammoth shit. And you are becoming more and more classy specialist ... on mammoth shit. With prospects only in the debit of this, which in the world is becoming less and less (but not at your current job).
Sooner or later, for one reason or another, you change jobs. And then you have to talk with people who have long been on version 2.0. And look a little ingratiating, because s / n would like a senior, and you understand that so far not even the middle. And well, if you understand.
Yes, according to technology 2.0, to that point, guides are viewed and there have even been attempts to code something. But if you are a good and responsible specialist, then there was not much time. Because at work, there are tasks, and at home ... already exhausted at work ...
Accordingly, you are waiting for the pain of the new rake. A potential employer problems from crutches. With which you will ingeniously wrap rakes. And employers, reptiles such, perfectly understand everything. And do not mind sharing with you the cost of your "very fast learning", "reasonably" underestimated s / n.
Yes, everyone wants to hire a ready-made specialist, whose “racking-in” period will take a couple of days (ideally, a couple of days that take up formalities and setting up a workplace). They want to hire, but they cannot. Not so many orphaned good runs around the market. Well, sometimes they run, but they don’t give them special run, they immediately slap them with offers.
Consequently, employers are willing to suffer and unpredictable delays from rakes and possible pain from crutches. And they are ready to take on the senior positions of the current middles with the expectation that they will grow rapidly. Especially if these middles have already been seniors and showed results. Therefore, interviews are often not on technology, but because they used to do what problems they had and how they solved * ( * The author thought so at the time of starting work on the article, then walked around the interviews with “write sorting on a piece of paper” and is now lost in thought ).
And at this moment, you can make a sly trick with your ear. Take and do not go to work on the platform 2.0. You can search (and find a job!) On a completely different platform.
Yah! Brad, you say. It does not happen. Hmm ... I did it many times. And, unlike the heroes of the famous TV show, I did it.
Yes, sometimes, you have to sacrifice salary or a possible increase to it. Yes, you need to spend time studying technology and try to do something about it. We'll have to notably run around the interviews and get a pack of failures. But sooner or later you find work ... By the way, several times it was that those who refused to me at first, then repeatedly called back and lured me with different buns.
Now the question is - why should I change the platform? I will leave the most delicious at the end of the article, but there is something to say here.
What lies on the surface:
Just after some time, the technology that brought reliable bread with butter and caviar can be blown away. It’s so powerful that it’s not easy to earn her bread. And even not deflated, but in fact die. And often this is demonstrated to us in another institute, arranging training in necroplatforms. I found Clipper and Supercalc in 96 (I started writing what it was, but writing a huge paragraph, erased it - the article was not about archeology, but as early as 96, both of these products had to be taught to archaeologists). And we, instead of learning a lesson (that nothing lasts forever in IT), grumbled at shitmammontovedov teachers.
And even if the technology is far from death, it can simply leave the “HYIP zone”. That is, the market can massively abandon the technology and move on to something else. I will not even give examples - you can remember a lot of them yourself, even if IT is just a couple of years old.
In case the technology “died”, you lose in salary and it becomes difficult to find a job.
If antihaypananla probably lose in salary, and with the search for work "only" you feel the difficulty. But for those who are used to the fact that employers are tearing apart, in such a situation it is very uncomfortable and depressive (I know this firsthand - it’s really hard, especially if the family is hanging on their hands).
There is only one way out - to choose from the “HYIP pool” the most interesting platform for you and dive into it with your head. And it is less difficult than trying to squeeze profit from rapidly aging knowledge and skills (my experience says so). And the funny thing is, it's interesting. You have to strain your brains: read, understand, build tools and solutions for your tasks. Me from this often just rushing is not childish. And note that this quest is for employer's money.
Yes, sometimes, it happens that a new technology does not enter at all. Constantly stuck in the barriers and limitations of technology. But studying a new one, at least in 2 of 3 cases, is much more interesting than “riveting of molds”.
The fact is that at the work where you have been for a long time, where you have been loved and respected, there is one problem - the rut. You built it yourself and you have a lot of guitar from it. You know how the system works, methods and tools have been developed that allow it to be expanded, if not infinitely, but in the horizon of the year for sure. You know what a business is planning, you know what new systems will be made on the basis of your developments (business likes ready-made quick solutions) and ...
And this is ... boring. Because the rut. According to which the business is speeding into financial distance, and you just provide the forward movement of the locomotive and, sometimes, a major overhaul ... of the station buffet.
And even if you change jobs, but do not change the technology, then ... Here you come to a new place where people are trying to make a mixture of a funicular with an armadillo. And here you are: let's not hang the rails on redwoods (especially since not all redwoods have grown yet). We better use sleepers of A1 * ( * real size ) and MT-LB-70PX * rails ( * random numbers and letters ). You can quickly make a narrow gauge for the prototype, then, if that, we will rehash the canvas.
Everyone is amused, inspired, applauded. Assign you the main rock star and go cut sequoias on the sleepers of the specified size. And to you ... already at this stage it becomes boring. You were going to make a funicular, but it is not needed for the transportation of coal and sticks. And you are again building the usual rut, except in a slightly different landscape.
In fact, the solutions that have been worked out are very cool. For business. The employer suddenly gets what he has dreamed about for a long time. And showered you, if not with buns, then with immense respect. Yes, this is also something that should be felt in life. But, again, boredom and ... a limited horizon for the use of "solid groundwork." Business is ready to use and very outdated solutions, if they give a quick profit. But also for the time being.
When I got into a long-term rut, I noticed a sharp decrease in productivity and brain activity. I love, appreciate, ... but I have to creak with myself with a creak.
In these cases, it makes sense again to change the work and / or platform. Of course, there are other ways to get out of this state, without extreme sports. But, I'm not an enemy to my own reasoning, although ...
Although ... well, in contradiction to myself. Work in a rut, somewhat annoying me personally, because I got used to think quickly and make decisions (though not always true). I like to solve problems. To find cool or cunning compromise solutions, and even with a pont, suggest crunched crutches (stipulating that, generally speaking, it is impossible). But to implement a solution is already boring.
But this is my mindset. The team works with me guys who are dragged on what they do, and not on how. They are fun to see in the system a new feature and be proud that it appeared thanks to them. I alsosuffer from this, albeit to a lesser extent.
Therefore ... I learned to focus on the delta of what was done, which gives motivation. I specifically find time to just play around with the system (not on the account, honestly, honestly). See what happened, what it cost me (at the same time to find a few places that it’s time to grind a file). Also work in a rut helps hobbies. It gives a drive, and you get positive emotions from closed tasks.
However, when working in a rut with rock stars (I'm immodest), the performance drops noticeably, simply because for successful work (in a rut) one cannot fully concentrate on work. Need parallel motivation. And the authorities begin to squint with the eye: how so? Some features take as much time as the prototype was downloaded, which immediately went into the prod. This must be treated with understanding or again ... thinking about changing jobs.
The developer has to learn all the time. Yes, this applies to any profession. I remember the same thing the dentist told me. But the dentist is unlikely to encounter a situation where, over the course of a couple of years, 80% of clinics suddenly switch to a quasi portalizer instead of a drill. And cunning employers will pay pennies for the place of the remaining drills (do not throw out the same).
In IT, the rate of change rolls over. Yes, there are fundamental skills: variables, cycles, classes, structures, structure transformations, mathematical methods, patterns. But, damn, quantum computers are on the way and, perhaps, all that I have in my luggage is already rapidly turning into a pumpkin superposition.
The brain is the only organ that can grow at any age. And the speed of development (and, unfortunately, degradation) makes any biceps like the Tu-160 sparrow.
And the greater the load, the better the form (up to a certain limit, of course). Learning in a new way is just the kind of load that is most conducive to the brain. To compare: this is how to carry sacks of potatoes in the country or "weight" in the gym. The load on the volume is comparable, but on the "taste sensations" - no. Well, if you are not a gardener, of course.
And the more you study, the better it turns out. Plus, during the total training, it is not possible to work for the whole coil - at some point there is a shortage of materiel and it is necessary to replace the “plowing” with guides. This just gives the brain rest from not at all useful monotonous loads, especially in the emergency mode. I, sorting out my code, written in the mode of 60-80 hour work week, was in a certain surprise. From the fact that he did not use not only new, but in general, any tools I know that did not have a powerful working out. There were no brain resources not only to learn, but at least to remember. Well, except for those things without which it was impossible to advance at all.
As many university lecturers say: higher education gives two things - terminology to talk with specialists and ... the ability to learn. But the last, not forever, but while using it.
Yes, a deep specialist in the idea can pay more than a wide one, but there are not enough places with megazarplata for “narrow” ones. But the “broad” ones easily find work, because there is a choice and the toad does not stifle, if the salary is “just a little above the market”.
Owning multiple platforms is much easier to build a career more flexibly. This is not only an opportunity to change the employer more quickly. As part of their team or their department / management, all sorts of “internal start-ups” often arise. This can be both the initiative of the developers themselves, and the emergence of resources to finally make a pink-blue wishlist of a business.
And this is not only a chance to change stasis, but also to do it on the job. And, perhaps, get a salary / career growth or share in the business. Just because there was no back / front / data scientist in the team, it was interesting for you to try, and people were glad that at least someone would try.
I already mentioned earlier about rakes and crutches. The value and growth of a specialist is the possession of a tool. Without walking on the rake of growth will not be, even read smart books and guides.
When doing a part, it is often useful to represent the whole. If you have experience with backender, then working with the front you better imagine what you can get / give to the server. What is easy for you to do, and what will require serious effort. Backender with front experience understands better what kind of data and in what form the front-endder is waiting for him.
In addition, you better understand the system as a whole and understand how it will continue to develop. What things are critical and which are not. What can and should be done “softly”, and where it is better to hardcode and not soar.
It also helps in “trading” resources. When you imagine how much “it costs” to finish at the other end of the interface and what side effects may arise, it is easier to negotiate with your colleagues for “optional” improvements. Even against the background of all-a-time colleagues.
Even if the experience is not so diverse, then owning "neighboring" technologies, you often find interesting solutions in your current one.
Plus, a long-desired opportunity.
ABOUT! FullStek is awesome. It sounds. Just imagine how the world lies at your feet, the line of employers goes beyond the horizon, girls smile on the street, and in a rocking chair you take 30 kg more weight. In fact, a little bit wrong.
The main niche of fullstek is small firms and small projects. Yes, often small in volume, but not least. Where are you king and god of all code. He made the front himself, he made the middle himself and wrote down the database himself. And then there are two options:
Both have perspectives. In the first case, if the business is trampled, then most likely you will become a team leader. Although the situations are different, a couple of my colleagues were looking for Padawans for themselves, and found their superiors. But, most likely, the team leader will remain a person who has maximum knowledge about the system, if he has at least some leadership and organizational skills. Clearly - that's growth.
In the second case, it is possible to sip a lily and stay on support. The work does not hit the bedridden, but the bosses are not aware that IT salaries are constantly growing. And if it is in the know, it will pretend that it is not in the know. But, if the system is really the cornerstone for business, and the business is adequate, then in order not to lose the key (and only specialist) you can make an offer ... Which is difficult to refuse. Options for increasing motivation:
But the latter is rare, although I heard firsthand such a situation. But, as a result, they didn’t cut their fingers, only they were frightened. Boring
Actually, the work of a fullstek can bring many, many rulez, but ...
It's cherry time on the cake. But in my hydrocyanic cherry a little more than the norm.
And that's the thing. Context switch What we love to talk about when we fly on deadlines in the tasks we have taken. In all two tasks taken. And it actually exists. And hardest hit by full stack.
The greatest salaries, the most interesting work and the fastest career growth in the forefront. When you go to the edge of the unknown and start doing something that no one has ever done (well, or did, but did not write about it on the Internet). When a business wants something, it has money for it, but does not know how it should look and sometimes even how to work. Or when you have conflicting requirements for the interface and / or system. And in order to advance, you need to find some non-standard moves and solutions.
In such a situation, sooner or later you begin to beat the wall. Those are the most controversial requirements. Speed ​​versus flexibility. Understanding vs sufficiency. Here either make a crutch on a crutch in the hope of someday come and rake. Or go deep into the creative search, try different options and wait for insight. But in reality, it steers the balance of crutches and insights. But if crutches win with a crushing score, then the project becomes stillborn. Therefore, insights are so important.
But they usually come when deeply immersed in the topic. With the whole context. It is not necessary to sit at the monitor or above sheets of paper all the time. If you are immersed deeply, then thefairy-freebie often comes in. All the work goes on in the background, and you can just walk, ride a bike, play hockey, have sex, be in a drinking bout, ... And click! And here it is - a solution, it is simple and obvious.
But the more context you switch, the less insights. Therefore, the fate of fulstek is either strong middle products or distortions in one of the parts. Brilliant front and middle back, flying back and shoals at the front. Either one and the other fire, but the deadlines are flying.
Plus damn Buridan donkeys. Who are walking around you and shove under the arm, then under the right, then under the left: let's get it better at the front gash, and no, no, on the back will be better. I would kill.
But the multisteakness in the forefront often gives breakthroughs. You have less fog of war, because you can present the problems of other parts of the system, voice them ... and leave professionals to deal with them. Plus, some of the solutions from the front-back-middle-practice are quite transportable.
I do not insist on anything * ( * blatant lie ). But for me the experience and importance of fulstek is somewhat overrated. On the contrary, multisteakness is fatally undervalued. But owning several aspects of the development is a big plus. For this they will not pay extra, and during interviews this will not always give a serious advantage. But work becomes more fun and easier. In addition, you can always wipe your nose pontoon colleagues backenders / frontends in a good friendly conversation with beer or borscht. And yes, I myself reviewing the resume consider the experience in several stacks a plus (if it is serious) and I advise you on the same.
I liked to change technology, learn something new. And it almost does not affect the salary.
Yes, and in the article I run a bit on fulltechs. In fact, when I started writing an article (more precisely, a month after I returned to the first draft), I had a great preoffer for fullstek. Perfect for everyone except the s / n, which we did not agree on. And I was hoping to write about the fulsteks of filth, and at the end of the article to say that I am now full stack. But, alas, the frontends rule * ( * according to the results of my megalomania and the current main stack ).
This is a matter of respect. I do not climb into the back kitchen. And when I put the task on the back, I clearly paint the interface (again in REST terms) and briefly describe why I need it and how I intend to use it. How it is implemented on the back is not my business, how I implement the work of the front and where I will place the buttons - not them.
Do you already understand what the article is about? So - a little about that. I work as a single. But actually, I'm a multistek. Moreover, he worked and gave the result to the seigneur and team lid in the front, back-up, full-stack, system and even business analysis. And I am glad that I have such a background.
')
What is good in it, and how I came to this under the cut.
Go.
In many articles, I immediately Feil intrigue. I put the conclusions at the beginning of the article, and then open the topic, with explanations, examples, jokes and trolling. Especially when the conclusions are contradictory, and the explanations are shaky. I see no reason not to save someone time here.
I believe that, if possible, it is worthwhile to work in several areas. Especially in youth, when the brains are not killed, and there is no responsibility to the family and children. Moreover, when changing the stasis you almost never lose in salary, and in the long run you win.
PS I write mostly about seniors, but everything can be brought down a step below (I have little experience with middle work).
Pps. I use the terms technology and platform (as synonyms) for a programming language and / or framework. It is not by chance in the context of the article. "Deep knowledge of the language" is often nothing, in front of a deep and practical knowledge of libraries (perhaps, if you do not take LISP / Hackel or C ++ with perversions). Therefore, let's say Python + Hadoop, Python + CV and Python + ML are different technologies / platforms for my taste. Of course, often people who have knowledge in computer vision are at least interested in machine learning, and even distributed computing. But ... to become a great expert on these three platforms, it is not enough to be a specialist on one.
- Knowledge becomes obsolete
- Habit of learning
- Diversification
- HYIP
- The whole helps particulars
So.
Technology lifetime
Any technology lives on average 5 years * ( * Author's fantasies ). Then either it is superseded by something else. Either the technology moves to version 2.0, declaratively ideologically compatible with the previous one, and not really ...
In fact, you have to learn again. Moreover: you have to break yourself, give up comfortable developments and familiar logic. It hurts, hard and freaking out. When a simple task (in version 1.0), in version 2.0 it requires hellish crutches and a ton of code. Then, of course, you discover that the task could be solved more than simply. Easier than 1.0. Just not like I used to.
In any case, there is a five-year cycle for which knowledge and best practices are worthless. Therefore, in the development constantly have to learn. Run to stay in place, as well as Alice in Wonderland. He stopped, fell behind and demand falls.
And what a shame that we have to learn jerks. You sit for yourself, kodish without rozdychu, you work out tricks, you learn subtle features and "standard khaki." And there ... times! A new version. And half of the knowledge is no longer needed by potential employers. And this means that it will be difficult to build a conversation with your employer, starting with: “this is the situation on the market here ...”
For it will be a pure bluff. After all, in the current work, they continue to successfully and actively use the once-hype platform. Which gradually becomes a mammoth shit. And you are becoming more and more classy specialist ... on mammoth shit. With prospects only in the debit of this, which in the world is becoming less and less (but not at your current job).
Sooner or later, for one reason or another, you change jobs. And then you have to talk with people who have long been on version 2.0. And look a little ingratiating, because s / n would like a senior, and you understand that so far not even the middle. And well, if you understand.
Yes, according to technology 2.0, to that point, guides are viewed and there have even been attempts to code something. But if you are a good and responsible specialist, then there was not much time. Because at work, there are tasks, and at home ... already exhausted at work ...
Accordingly, you are waiting for the pain of the new rake. A potential employer problems from crutches. With which you will ingeniously wrap rakes. And employers, reptiles such, perfectly understand everything. And do not mind sharing with you the cost of your "very fast learning", "reasonably" underestimated s / n.
Yes, everyone wants to hire a ready-made specialist, whose “racking-in” period will take a couple of days (ideally, a couple of days that take up formalities and setting up a workplace). They want to hire, but they cannot. Not so many orphaned good runs around the market. Well, sometimes they run, but they don’t give them special run, they immediately slap them with offers.
Consequently, employers are willing to suffer and unpredictable delays from rakes and possible pain from crutches. And they are ready to take on the senior positions of the current middles with the expectation that they will grow rapidly. Especially if these middles have already been seniors and showed results. Therefore, interviews are often not on technology, but because they used to do what problems they had and how they solved * ( * The author thought so at the time of starting work on the article, then walked around the interviews with “write sorting on a piece of paper” and is now lost in thought ).
And at this moment, you can make a sly trick with your ear. Take and do not go to work on the platform 2.0. You can search (and find a job!) On a completely different platform.
Yah! Brad, you say. It does not happen. Hmm ... I did it many times. And, unlike the heroes of the famous TV show, I did it.
Yes, sometimes, you have to sacrifice salary or a possible increase to it. Yes, you need to spend time studying technology and try to do something about it. We'll have to notably run around the interviews and get a pack of failures. But sooner or later you find work ... By the way, several times it was that those who refused to me at first, then repeatedly called back and lured me with different buns.
Now the question is - why should I change the platform? I will leave the most delicious at the end of the article, but there is something to say here.
What lies on the surface:
- hopeless obsolescence of technology or withdrawal of technology from the “hyip zone”
- banal boredom and obscurity
Just after some time, the technology that brought reliable bread with butter and caviar can be blown away. It’s so powerful that it’s not easy to earn her bread. And even not deflated, but in fact die. And often this is demonstrated to us in another institute, arranging training in necroplatforms. I found Clipper and Supercalc in 96 (I started writing what it was, but writing a huge paragraph, erased it - the article was not about archeology, but as early as 96, both of these products had to be taught to archaeologists). And we, instead of learning a lesson (that nothing lasts forever in IT), grumbled at shitmammontovedov teachers.
And even if the technology is far from death, it can simply leave the “HYIP zone”. That is, the market can massively abandon the technology and move on to something else. I will not even give examples - you can remember a lot of them yourself, even if IT is just a couple of years old.
In case the technology “died”, you lose in salary and it becomes difficult to find a job.
If antihaypananla probably lose in salary, and with the search for work "only" you feel the difficulty. But for those who are used to the fact that employers are tearing apart, in such a situation it is very uncomfortable and depressive (I know this firsthand - it’s really hard, especially if the family is hanging on their hands).
There is only one way out - to choose from the “HYIP pool” the most interesting platform for you and dive into it with your head. And it is less difficult than trying to squeeze profit from rapidly aging knowledge and skills (my experience says so). And the funny thing is, it's interesting. You have to strain your brains: read, understand, build tools and solutions for your tasks. Me from this often just rushing is not childish. And note that this quest is for employer's money.
Yes, sometimes, it happens that a new technology does not enter at all. Constantly stuck in the barriers and limitations of technology. But studying a new one, at least in 2 of 3 cases, is much more interesting than “riveting of molds”.
The fact is that at the work where you have been for a long time, where you have been loved and respected, there is one problem - the rut. You built it yourself and you have a lot of guitar from it. You know how the system works, methods and tools have been developed that allow it to be expanded, if not infinitely, but in the horizon of the year for sure. You know what a business is planning, you know what new systems will be made on the basis of your developments (business likes ready-made quick solutions) and ...
And this is ... boring. Because the rut. According to which the business is speeding into financial distance, and you just provide the forward movement of the locomotive and, sometimes, a major overhaul ... of the station buffet.
And even if you change jobs, but do not change the technology, then ... Here you come to a new place where people are trying to make a mixture of a funicular with an armadillo. And here you are: let's not hang the rails on redwoods (especially since not all redwoods have grown yet). We better use sleepers of A1 * ( * real size ) and MT-LB-70PX * rails ( * random numbers and letters ). You can quickly make a narrow gauge for the prototype, then, if that, we will rehash the canvas.
Everyone is amused, inspired, applauded. Assign you the main rock star and go cut sequoias on the sleepers of the specified size. And to you ... already at this stage it becomes boring. You were going to make a funicular, but it is not needed for the transportation of coal and sticks. And you are again building the usual rut, except in a slightly different landscape.
In fact, the solutions that have been worked out are very cool. For business. The employer suddenly gets what he has dreamed about for a long time. And showered you, if not with buns, then with immense respect. Yes, this is also something that should be felt in life. But, again, boredom and ... a limited horizon for the use of "solid groundwork." Business is ready to use and very outdated solutions, if they give a quick profit. But also for the time being.
When I got into a long-term rut, I noticed a sharp decrease in productivity and brain activity. I love, appreciate, ... but I have to creak with myself with a creak.
In these cases, it makes sense again to change the work and / or platform. Of course, there are other ways to get out of this state, without extreme sports. But, I'm not an enemy to my own reasoning, although ...
Although ... well, in contradiction to myself. Work in a rut, somewhat annoying me personally, because I got used to think quickly and make decisions (though not always true). I like to solve problems. To find cool or cunning compromise solutions, and even with a pont, suggest crunched crutches (stipulating that, generally speaking, it is impossible). But to implement a solution is already boring.
But this is my mindset. The team works with me guys who are dragged on what they do, and not on how. They are fun to see in the system a new feature and be proud that it appeared thanks to them. I also
Therefore ... I learned to focus on the delta of what was done, which gives motivation. I specifically find time to just play around with the system (not on the account, honestly, honestly). See what happened, what it cost me (at the same time to find a few places that it’s time to grind a file). Also work in a rut helps hobbies. It gives a drive, and you get positive emotions from closed tasks.
However, when working in a rut with rock stars (I'm immodest), the performance drops noticeably, simply because for successful work (in a rut) one cannot fully concentrate on work. Need parallel motivation. And the authorities begin to squint with the eye: how so? Some features take as much time as the prototype was downloaded, which immediately went into the prod. This must be treated with understanding or again ... thinking about changing jobs.
Learn habit and curiosity
The developer has to learn all the time. Yes, this applies to any profession. I remember the same thing the dentist told me. But the dentist is unlikely to encounter a situation where, over the course of a couple of years, 80% of clinics suddenly switch to a quasi portalizer instead of a drill. And cunning employers will pay pennies for the place of the remaining drills (do not throw out the same).
In IT, the rate of change rolls over. Yes, there are fundamental skills: variables, cycles, classes, structures, structure transformations, mathematical methods, patterns. But, damn, quantum computers are on the way and, perhaps, all that I have in my luggage is already rapidly turning into a pumpkin superposition.
The brain is the only organ that can grow at any age. And the speed of development (and, unfortunately, degradation) makes any biceps like the Tu-160 sparrow.
And the greater the load, the better the form (up to a certain limit, of course). Learning in a new way is just the kind of load that is most conducive to the brain. To compare: this is how to carry sacks of potatoes in the country or "weight" in the gym. The load on the volume is comparable, but on the "taste sensations" - no. Well, if you are not a gardener, of course.
And the more you study, the better it turns out. Plus, during the total training, it is not possible to work for the whole coil - at some point there is a shortage of materiel and it is necessary to replace the “plowing” with guides. This just gives the brain rest from not at all useful monotonous loads, especially in the emergency mode. I, sorting out my code, written in the mode of 60-80 hour work week, was in a certain surprise. From the fact that he did not use not only new, but in general, any tools I know that did not have a powerful working out. There were no brain resources not only to learn, but at least to remember. Well, except for those things without which it was impossible to advance at all.
As many university lecturers say: higher education gives two things - terminology to talk with specialists and ... the ability to learn. But the last, not forever, but while using it.
Yes, a deep specialist in the idea can pay more than a wide one, but there are not enough places with megazarplata for “narrow” ones. But the “broad” ones easily find work, because there is a choice and the toad does not stifle, if the salary is “just a little above the market”.
Diversify yourself loved one
Owning multiple platforms is much easier to build a career more flexibly. This is not only an opportunity to change the employer more quickly. As part of their team or their department / management, all sorts of “internal start-ups” often arise. This can be both the initiative of the developers themselves, and the emergence of resources to finally make a pink-blue wishlist of a business.
And this is not only a chance to change stasis, but also to do it on the job. And, perhaps, get a salary / career growth or share in the business. Just because there was no back / front / data scientist in the team, it was interesting for you to try, and people were glad that at least someone would try.
I already mentioned earlier about rakes and crutches. The value and growth of a specialist is the possession of a tool. Without walking on the rake of growth will not be, even read smart books and guides.
And last but not least
When doing a part, it is often useful to represent the whole. If you have experience with backender, then working with the front you better imagine what you can get / give to the server. What is easy for you to do, and what will require serious effort. Backender with front experience understands better what kind of data and in what form the front-endder is waiting for him.
In addition, you better understand the system as a whole and understand how it will continue to develop. What things are critical and which are not. What can and should be done “softly”, and where it is better to hardcode and not soar.
It also helps in “trading” resources. When you imagine how much “it costs” to finish at the other end of the interface and what side effects may arise, it is easier to negotiate with your colleagues for “optional” improvements. Even against the background of all-a-time colleagues.
Even if the experience is not so diverse, then owning "neighboring" technologies, you often find interesting solutions in your current one.
Plus, a long-desired opportunity.
Full stack capability
ABOUT! FullStek is awesome. It sounds. Just imagine how the world lies at your feet, the line of employers goes beyond the horizon, girls smile on the street, and in a rocking chair you take 30 kg more weight. In fact, a little bit wrong.
The main niche of fullstek is small firms and small projects. Yes, often small in volume, but not least. Where are you king and god of all code. He made the front himself, he made the middle himself and wrote down the database himself. And then there are two options:
- you took on the outgrowth of the system
- everything suits the employer
Both have perspectives. In the first case, if the business is trampled, then most likely you will become a team leader. Although the situations are different, a couple of my colleagues were looking for Padawans for themselves, and found their superiors. But, most likely, the team leader will remain a person who has maximum knowledge about the system, if he has at least some leadership and organizational skills. Clearly - that's growth.
In the second case, it is possible to sip a lily and stay on support. The work does not hit the bedridden, but the bosses are not aware that IT salaries are constantly growing. And if it is in the know, it will pretend that it is not in the know. But, if the system is really the cornerstone for business, and the business is adequate, then in order not to lose the key (and only specialist) you can make an offer ... Which is difficult to refuse. Options for increasing motivation:
- loyal half-home work schedule
- s / n above market
- income share
- cut off your fingers if you want to leave
But the latter is rare, although I heard firsthand such a situation. But, as a result, they didn’t cut their fingers, only they were frightened. Boring
Actually, the work of a fullstek can bring many, many rulez, but ...
Little bitterness
It's cherry time on the cake. But in my hydrocyanic cherry a little more than the norm.
And that's the thing. Context switch What we love to talk about when we fly on deadlines in the tasks we have taken. In all two tasks taken. And it actually exists. And hardest hit by full stack.
The greatest salaries, the most interesting work and the fastest career growth in the forefront. When you go to the edge of the unknown and start doing something that no one has ever done (well, or did, but did not write about it on the Internet). When a business wants something, it has money for it, but does not know how it should look and sometimes even how to work. Or when you have conflicting requirements for the interface and / or system. And in order to advance, you need to find some non-standard moves and solutions.
In such a situation, sooner or later you begin to beat the wall. Those are the most controversial requirements. Speed ​​versus flexibility. Understanding vs sufficiency. Here either make a crutch on a crutch in the hope of someday come and rake. Or go deep into the creative search, try different options and wait for insight. But in reality, it steers the balance of crutches and insights. But if crutches win with a crushing score, then the project becomes stillborn. Therefore, insights are so important.
But they usually come when deeply immersed in the topic. With the whole context. It is not necessary to sit at the monitor or above sheets of paper all the time. If you are immersed deeply, then the
But the more context you switch, the less insights. Therefore, the fate of fulstek is either strong middle products or distortions in one of the parts. Brilliant front and middle back, flying back and shoals at the front. Either one and the other fire, but the deadlines are flying.
Plus damn Buridan donkeys. Who are walking around you and shove under the arm, then under the right, then under the left: let's get it better at the front gash, and no, no, on the back will be better. I would kill.
But the multisteakness in the forefront often gives breakthroughs. You have less fog of war, because you can present the problems of other parts of the system, voice them ... and leave professionals to deal with them. Plus, some of the solutions from the front-back-middle-practice are quite transportable.
findings
I do not insist on anything * ( * blatant lie ). But for me the experience and importance of fulstek is somewhat overrated. On the contrary, multisteakness is fatally undervalued. But owning several aspects of the development is a big plus. For this they will not pay extra, and during interviews this will not always give a serious advantage. But work becomes more fun and easier. In addition, you can always wipe your nose pontoon colleagues backenders / frontends in a good friendly conversation with beer or borscht. And yes, I myself reviewing the resume consider the experience in several stacks a plus (if it is serious) and I advise you on the same.
I liked to change technology, learn something new. And it almost does not affect the salary.
Yes, and in the article I run a bit on fulltechs. In fact, when I started writing an article (more precisely, a month after I returned to the first draft), I had a great preoffer for fullstek. Perfect for everyone except the s / n, which we did not agree on. And I was hoping to write about the fulsteks of filth, and at the end of the article to say that I am now full stack. But, alas, the frontends rule * ( * according to the results of my megalomania and the current main stack ).
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/455469/
All Articles