I mostly agree with exception of: it heavily depends on where you work.
I mostly agree with exception of: it heavily depends on where you work. The exact logging configuration example is a prime example of what an ISV customer would want to change - many of our customers (and QA) go as far as writing their own adapters so they need to be able to completely customize the configuration. You have to draw the line somewhere, though. I tend to err on the side of "unconfigurable" until a request is made to make something configurable. E.g. Someone had the smart idea of having all our logging messages in a config file all the years back when the logging component was written, which is an incredibly frustrating anti-pattern. That was never needed and the messages should have been stored elsewhere.
Posted by zamalek on Jun 8, 2015, 1:50 PM
Tags
Related issues
- That isn't really relevant for the tool starting the container.
- Why is there no link to the source?
- Something I wonder about in this domain is if this is the fault of the language.
- Namespace pollution is an annoying problem in Rust.
- Currently, no language ports of Timefold Solver are planned.
- I agree with you, almost all .NET code I write is within the .NET framework, yet when I look at C# repos, it's disheartening to see so ma...
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.6,000 issues0 comments
hackernews (Software)
That isn't really relevant for the tool starting the container.
Why is there no link to the source?
Something I wonder about in this domain is if this is the fault of the language.
Namespace pollution is an annoying problem in Rust.
Currently, no language ports of Timefold Solver are planned.
I agree with you, almost all .NET code I write is within the .NET framework, yet when I look at C# repos, it's disheartening to see so ma...
Why is there no simple workaround for this?
I have been using https://github.com/jacktasia/dumb-jump to quickly jump to definitions.
I mostly agree with exception of: it heavily depends on where you work.
I mostly agree with exception of: it heavily depends on where you work. The exact logging configuration example is a prime example of what an ISV customer would want to change - many of our customers (and QA) go as far as writing their own adapters so they need to be able to completely customize the configuration. You have to draw the line somewhere, though. I tend to err on the side of "unconfigurable" until a request is made to make something configurable. E.g. Someone had the smart idea of having all our logging messages in a config file all the years back when the logging component was written, which is an incredibly frustrating anti-pattern. That was never needed and the messages should have been stored elsewhere.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.