测试开发人员与开发人员_9对5的开发人员可以成为优秀的开发人员吗？

测试开发人员与开发人员

For more on personal development for developers, check out this episode of our podcast, The Versioning Show, covering the three keys of being a productive software engineer.

有关开发人员的个人开发的更多信息，请查看我们的播客的这一集 ，即Versioning Show，其中涵盖了成为一名高效软件工程师的三个关键要素。

While picking talks for the conference he’s organizing, James Titcumb recently tweeted that well known speakers get picked over others because, among other things, they’re reliable (i.e. they don’t cancel). I would argue that “among other things” carries more weight – I believe that most conference organizers pick such talks and speakers because they like to play it safe and fear risks.

James Titcumb在为他组织的会议进行演讲时，最近发推文说，知名演讲者之所以被其他人选中，是因为他们很可靠(即他们不会取消)。 我认为 “除其他事项外”具有更大的分量-我相信大多数会议组织者会选择这样的演讲和演讲者，因为他们喜欢安全地进行演奏并担心会有风险。

I’m discovering it’s because organizers like to play it safe, and recycle 10 year old talks rather than take some risks with new ones. https://t.co/PXRhajhQXi

我发现这是因为组织者喜欢安全玩耍，并且回收已有10年历史的演讲，而不愿意冒险参加新的演讲。 https://t.co/PXRhajhQXi

— Bruno Skvorc (@bitfalls) April 28, 2017

— Bruno Skvorc(@bitfalls) 2017年4月28日

安全游戏 (A Safe Play)

The number of times I’ve seen a well known name from the PHP world hold a trivial (and, on their end, too, a “play it safe”) talk is staggering, and it always makes me feel like I try too hard with my submissions. In this day and age of almost instantly-available recordings, why have a talk more than a few times? By the second or third time around, it’s accessible to everyone online anyway. Why pick “safe” topics – who are you if you don’t push the limits of your own comfort zone? Invite discussion, polarization, and disagreement – grow yourself by learning from and educating those who disagree with you, find common ground, see things from people’s various perspectives, prevent the formation of an argument from authority. Stop acting like a prophet, and instead act like a human – fallible, capable of learning, and always curious.

我看到过来自PHP界的一个知名名称的演讲次数很少(到最后他们也说“安全”)令人震惊，这总是让我感到自己在努力尝试与我的意见书。 在当今几乎即时可用的录音时代，为什么谈话不止几次？ 到第二次或第三次时，无论如何在线上的每个人都可以访问它。 为什么要选择“安全”主题-如果您不突破自己的舒适区界限，您将是谁？ 邀请讨论，两极分化和意见分歧–通过向与您意见分歧的人学习和教育，发展自己，找到共同点，从人们的不同角度看待事情，防止权威争执的形成。 别像先知那样行事，而要像人类一样-容易犯错，有学习能力并且总是好奇。

When your whole career is banking on being a speaker, then I suppose it makes sense to have evergreen talks you don’t need to prepare. Traveling around the world and reciting the talk from the top of your head is a pretty good gig and I can’t fault such speakers for this approach any more than I can fault McDonalds for continuing to sell hamburgers. It works. But even McDonalds introduces a salad or a chicken wing from time to time.

当您的整个职业都是依靠演讲者时，那么我认为进行常绿的演讲就不需要您准备了。 环游世界并从头顶上朗读演讲是一个很好的演出，我不能为这样的演讲者指责这种做法，而我可以为麦当劳继续销售汉堡包指责。 有用。 但是，甚至麦当劳也时不时推出沙拉或鸡翅。

Then there’s also the “bubble” effect:

然后还有“气泡”效果 ：

@bitfalls @asgrim 90% do not have a twitter account and NEVER engage in discussions like this. It's the filter bubble that makes us feel these talks redudant

@bitfalls @asgrim 90％的人没有Twitter帐户，切勿参与此类讨论。 正是过滤泡沫使我们感到这些谈话是多余的

— Malte Blättermann (@mablae) April 28, 2017

— MalteBlättermann(@mablae) ，2017年4月28日

It works both ways, I think. Acceptance of the same speakers (indeed, I keep seeing the same 10-20 people at every conference) frightens the newer ones and prevents them from even submitting talk ideas. As if the impostor syndrome isn’t weighing down on them hard enough already, now they have to fight for scraps among themselves after those who are guaranteed to get in have picked the table clean.

我认为这是双向的。 接受同一位发言人(实际上，我每次会议都会看到10至20位相同的人)使新加入的发言人感到恐惧，并阻止他们甚至发表演讲想法。 仿佛冒名顶替综合症还没有给他们带来足够的沉重压力，现在，在保证进入的人们把桌子收拾干净之后，他们必须在自己之间争夺废料。

These days where “diversity” is aggressively pushed on everyone, the conference world seems strangely hostile to intellectual diversity. I wish there was a conference which guaranteed at least a 90% ratio of first-time (or first-year) speakers – oh how much more interesting the conference landscape would be!

如今，“多样性”被强加给所有人，当今的会议世界似乎对知识多样性充满敌意。 我希望能有一个会议能保证至少有90％的首次(或一年级)演讲者占比-哦，会议现场会变得更加有趣！

9比5 (The 9-to-5)

My opinions about conferences aside, this led us to another discussion where some argued* that these talks get recycled not because of speaker laziness or organizer cowardice, but because there are many attendees who have never been to a conference before and are blissfully unaware of such common topics as “What’s new in PHP7”, “Why use Composer”, “Good OOP”, “What’s TDD”, etc.

除了我对会议的看法外，我们还进行了另一次讨论，其中一些人认为*这些演讲之所以能得到回收，并不是因为演讲者的懒惰或组织者的怯ward，而是因为许多与会者以前从未参加过会议 ，并且很高兴没有意识到这一点。常见主题包括“ PHP7的新功能”，“为什么使用Composer”，“良好的OOP”，“什么是TDD”等。

@bitfalls @asgrim There are folks not having watched a talk EVER. They are sent to conferences by "the boss" to in hope they will learn something useful.

@bitfalls @asgrim 从来没有有人看过谈话。 他们被“老板”派往会议，希望他们能学到一些有用的东西。

— Malte Blättermann (@mablae) April 28, 2017

— MalteBlättermann(@mablae) ，2017年4月28日

This, to me, didn’t make much sense. If an employee had never been to a conference before, and the employer is finally sending them, it’s trivial to do a Google search about the topics being presented + their speakers, and recordings of their previous talks show up. Why would an employer who knows an employee has no interest in self-improvement (obviously, since they had never been to a conference) send them to a conference that’s, for the most part, wholly available online and for free?

对我来说，这没有多大意义。 如果某个员工以前从未参加过会议，而雇主最终要发送给他们，那么用Google搜索要呈现的主题及其演讲者并记录以前的谈话记录就很简单了。 为什么知道员工对自我完善没有兴趣的雇主(显然，因为他们从未参加过会议)会把他们发送到一次会议上，而该会议大部分都是在线免费提供的？

Granted, the conference might be the first-of-its-kind, but let’s be real – we’re talking PHP here, it’s not going to be talking about something groundbreaking.

诚然，这次会议可能是第一次，但是让我们成为现实吧–我们在这里谈论PHP，这并不是在谈论开创性的事情。

The boss might also hope the employee will meet new people there, perhaps do some recruiting, but that’s also hardly the role for a first-timer.

老板也可能希望员工会在那里见到新人，也许会招募一些人，但这对初学者来说几乎不是角色。

All of which begets the question – what kind of developer has so little interest in self-improvement? Marco Pivetta had something to say on that:

所有这些都引出了一个问题–哪种开发人员对自我完善的兴趣不大？ Marco Pivetta对此有话要说：

@bitfalls @mablae @asgrim This is extremely common. 90%+ developers are 9-to-5 people. At most clients I work for, I'm the only person going to conferences/doing OSS

@bitfalls @mablae @asgrim这是非常常见的。 90％以上的开发人员是9到5人。 在我工作的大多数客户中，我是唯一参加会议/进行OSS的人

— Stereotypo 🎧 (@Ocramius) April 28, 2017

— Stereotypo🎧(@Ocramius) 2017年4月28日

This baffled me.

这让我感到困惑。

You come to work. You know your tasks. You do them. You go home and… repeat the next day? Provided it’s not exactly a job at which there’s a lot of downtime, how does such a developer keep up with best practices or new approaches to recommend to bosses in order to improve the app, or assert some leadership, advance in their career? Turns out, they don’t:

你来上班 你知道你的任务。 你去做 你回家，……第二天重复一遍？ 如果这不是造成大量停机时间的工作，那么这样的开发人员如何跟上最佳实践或新方法来推荐给老板，以改善应用程序或维护领导才能，从而促进职业发展？ 事实证明，他们没有：

@bitfalls @Ocramius @asgrim In my last job not the case: Stuck in php 4.9/5.2 mindset, "fiddeling around until it seems to work" style.

@bitfalls @Ocramius @asgrim在我的上一份工作中，情况并非如此：陷入php 4.9 / 5.2的思维定式，“四处寻找，直到看起来可行”。

— Malte Blättermann (@mablae) April 28, 2017

— MalteBlättermann(@mablae) ，2017年4月28日

Wait, what? This is terrible.

等一下 这真糟糕。

In order to stay relevant in our field, we have to constantly keep learning. We have to actively seek out new technologies, study them, and decide whether or not they’re worth paying attention to. We need to not only assess their potential to solve future problems, but also re-solve past problems on these new potential solutions for the sake of identifying better approaches.

为了保持在我们领域的重要性，我们必须不断学习。 我们必须积极寻找新技术，对其进行研究，并确定它们是否值得关注。 我们不仅需要评估它们解决未来问题的潜力，还需要在这些新的潜在解决方案上重新解决过去的问题，以便确定更好的方法。

A developer who stops being a developer after 5 pm, especially if the job isn’t overly creative and lacks individual freedom to express oneself in solutions, will build good muscle memory, will remember the core functions and their inconsistent argument order, will be able to hammer everything into the shape of a nail and then drive that nail into anything, board or not. But that developer will never become a software engineer. That developer won’t be able to succinctly present new solutions and approaches, and won’t be able to influence the company’s growth in a good way.

下午5点后停止成为开发人员的开发人员，特别是如果工作不是太有创造力，并且缺乏在解决方案中表达自己的自由，就会建立良好的肌肉记忆力，会记住核心功能及其不一致的论证顺序，能够将所有东西锤成钉子的形状，然后将钉子钉进任何东西，无论是否木板。 但是那个开发人员永远不会成为软件工程师。 该开发人员将无法简洁地提出新的解决方案和方法，也无法以良好的方式影响公司的发展。

时间 (Time)

I understand the “No way, I’m married” or “No way, I have kids” or “My time is precious, I want to spend it one something I enjoy” sentiment Malte mentions in the thread. Time is the most precious resource we have, and with family, the value shoots up even more.

我理解“没有办法，我结婚了”或“没有办法，我有孩子”或“我的时间很宝贵，我想把它花在我喜欢的事情上”，马尔特在话题中提到。 时间是我们拥有的最宝贵的资源，而与家人在一起，价值会进一步增加。

But I firmly believe we’re in a tech bubble, and money earned now will be able to buy much more time later than the time used directly right now for a ratio of 1:1. It’s all a matter of balance, of course – moderation in all things is important – but time spent on learning, improving, and setting oneself up (and I’m not saying 24/7 here, but a few hours every day amount to a lot in the long run) – especially if one enjoys it – is an investment worth making. And if you’re not enjoying learning new things about your job, what are you doing working that job in the first place?

但我坚信，我们正处在科技泡沫中，现在赚到的钱将可以比现在直接使用的时间晚于1：1的时间购买更多时间。 当然，这完全是个平衡问题–在所有事情上保持节制都很重要–但是花在学习，改善和自我设置上的时间(我不是在这里说24/7，而是每天花几个小时从长远来看)(尤其是如果有人喜欢的话)是值得进行的投资。 而且，如果您不喜欢学习有关工作的新事物，那么您首先要从事的工作是什么？

In my opinion, you shouldn’t shy away from selling your time until you have enough money to buy more back than you sold. But you should charge a lot for it.

我认为，除非您有足够的钱买回比您卖出的还多的钱，否则您不应该回避出售自己的时间。 但是您应该为此付出很多 。

@bitfalls One trick though: charging more causes people to consider you more "authoritative". As an employee, prepare to be ignored. /cc @mablae

@bitfalls不过有一个窍门：收取更多费用会使人们认为您更具“权威性”。 作为一名员工，准备被忽略。 / cc @mablae

— Stereotypo 🎧 (@Ocramius) April 28, 2017

— Stereotypo🎧(@Ocramius) ，2017年4月28日

结论 (Conclusion)

In my opinion, a 9-to-5 developer can be a good developer or, rather, a good code-monkey, but cannot be a good software engineer, or a good community member.

在我看来，一个9到5的开发人员可以是一个好的开发人员，或者说是一个好的代码猴子，但不能是一个好的软件工程师或一个好的社区成员。

A developer who wants to stay relevant in the field and who wants to progress in their career simply must take initiative and learn. They need to see things long-term, and realize that unless they upgrade themselves now and get a career boost with learning, the time saved and used on “life” now will be wasted tenfold in the future, because the gains could have been high enough by then to buy much of that time back.

谁愿意留在该领域相关的，谁开发人员希望在其职业生涯的进步只是必须采取主动和学习。 他们需要长期看待事物，并意识到除非他们现在进行自我升级并通过学习获得职业发展的动力，否则现在在“生命”上节省和使用的时间将在未来浪费十倍，因为获得的收益可能很高到那时足以买回大部分时间。

It doesn’t even have to be development – there’s more ways to learn than just coding past 5 pm. Read tutorials, write tutorials (and earn some more money on the side), go to conferences to meet people and hear different ideas (excellent conferences like the WebSummerCamp even have a companion program so you don’t even have to leave the family behind) – there’s a wealth of options for every ambitious developer out there.

甚至不必开发-有更多的学习方法，而不仅仅是下午5点以后编码。 阅读教程， 编写教程 (并从侧面赚更多的钱)，参加会议与人们见面并听取不同的想法(像WebSummerCamp这样的出色会议甚至都有配套程序，因此您甚至不必离开家人) –每个雄心勃勃的开发人员都有很多选择。

How do you feel about conferences and recycled talks by the same speakers? How about the 9-to-5 fates? Do you keep learning after you come home, or just drop everything? What’s your end game? Discuss!

您如何看待同一位发言人的会议和再生演讲？ 9比5的命运如何？ 回家后还是继续学习，还是放弃一切？ 你的结局是什么？ 讨论！

*see? Disagreement! And I, as a fallible human, learned about new reasons behind some of the conference symptoms I was seeing.

*看到？ 意见分歧！ 作为一个容易犯错的人，我了解了一些我看到的会议症状背后的新原因。

翻译自: https://www.sitepoint.com/can-9-5-developers-good-developers/

测试开发人员与开发人员