From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: andreas.kahari@icm.uu.se (Andreas Kusalananda =?iso-8859-1?B?S+Ro5HJp?=) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 10:50:49 +0100 Subject: [TUHS] A man easter-egg (gimme gimme gimme) In-Reply-To: <201711220848.vAM8mUTd003779@freefriends.org> References: <201711220848.vAM8mUTd003779@freefriends.org> Message-ID: <20171122095049.gkayhpyr3h6o4tzf@box.local> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 01:48:30AM -0700, arnold at skeeve.com wrote: > Edouard KLEIN wrote: [cut] > > Subject: Re: [TUHS] A man easter-egg (gimme gimme gimme) > > > first circulated, or was it frowned upon ? > > > > As a former developer and manager, I would be really pissed off if my > > programmers wasted their time on writing useless frippery instead of > > quality code, and I would certainly have a little chat with them... > > I think that this is totally appropriate for code being developed > for a paid product. > > Arnold Hmm... As a manager, I'd be more annoyed if the code did not perform according to spec than I would be if single programmer spent half an hour amusing themselves. Being pedantic about time is a surefire way of demotivating a dev team. No matter who pays (or not pays) for the code to be produced, the end user, no matter it's clinical staff in a hospital or your uncle's son, need to be guaranteed that the code doesn't trigger unexpected behaviour when used. The risk of that is usually smaller if the product does not contain any easter eggs. -- Andreas Kusalananda Kähäri, National Bioinformatics Infrastructure Sweden (NBIS), Uppsala University, Sweden.