a problem i've observed in industry is that many es6 language-features have the unintended-consequence of incentivising incompetent javascript-developers at the expense of competent-ones. its generally difficult for many employers (even those knowledgeable in general-purpose programming), to discern between:
a) a competent javascript employee/contractor who can get things done and ship products (albeit with legitimate delays), and b) an incompetent-one who can easily hide themselves in non-productive es6 busywork, and continually pushback product-integration (again with “legitimate” delays, until its too late). its gotten bad enough that many industry-employers no longer trust general-purpose-programming technical-interviews when recruiting js-devs, and rely almost exclusively on either a) an applicant's reputation / word-of-mouth for getting things done, or b) their ability to complete a time-consuming tech-challenge, where they must demonstrate ability to ship a mini-product. both methods are not scalable to meet the demand in industry for qualified js-devs in product-development. the only solution i can think of to this industry-problem is to hold-back on introducing new disruptive/unproven javascript design-patterns, and figuring out how to educate the industry with tightened javascript style-guides and existing design-patterns proven to work (more is less); generally, ways to enhance the current, woefully inadequate “bullsh*t detector” of employers so they can better identify and mentor/train/weed-out unqualified js-devs. kai zhu kaizhu...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
