The simplest way is to cook with a cast iron skillet and directly eat out of the skillet then there is no plate to clean. And you don't even need detergent to clean the cast iron skillet. Just hot water with a brush is good enough.
lots of people play this game....you don't have to. it may ultimately limit your ability to gain a high paying position that lives entirely in the marketing-verse and spouts drivel. but not all of us wants that
You may not like it, but you should at least acknowledge the perspective. I can think of several examples of people whose primary skill is “managing up” and can impress those writing the checks.
I take pride in doing what I consider to be generating business value, but I strongly believe that my compensation would be higher if I spent more time self-promoting rather than doing “real work”.
I agree. I strongly suspect the people telling OP they aren't worried about finding another job are bullshitting him. Or in some cases, maybe their egos have them believing it too.
> Or in some cases, maybe their egos have them believing it too.
If that's the case, then mission accomplished. It seems that OP's root goal is to avoid the crippling anxiety and stress. Convincing yourself that it's not a problem -- even if it is -- also accomplishes that. Maybe it's not the best, but you're going to get laid off (or not) regardless of whatever anxiety or stress you feel leading up to that point. Better to just not feel the stress in the first place.
Really, though, is it that hard for you to believe that no one could feel confident in their skills such that they believe that they'd still be able to find a job during an economic downturn? It seems a little nonsensical to take that position.
I guess I should have said most people. I'm sure there are some high performers who aren't worried. I would think most average folks would be the ones who are concerned. I know I am.
on the contrary, I have seen people BSing their way be more insecure about their job during layoffs. During the layoffs its mostly strategic decision taken not just by your immediate boss but by CEOs or VP levels and managing up might not save your ass.
I’ve kept my skills in sync with the market and kept a strong network. Most of those years from 1996-2020 I was just your run of the mill enterprise CRUD developer.
I am mainly a dotnet developer but even I think that if you already have a team full of Java developers there is little to gain from switching to C#. Just the effort of learning a completely new set of libraries and frameworks would give me pause.
C# seems to be the pick for those programmed in microsoft ecosystem in the past, it's not attractive for beginners or non-microsoft-ecosystem developers per se, esp in this cloud and internet era.
I’m dumbfounded that anyone would believe that C# is not attractive for cloud development - Microsoft’s platform or otherwise. C# is a fantastic language and dotnet is a great, modern platform. IMO c# is a tad more beginner friendly than Java.
Also any time I have to use Java I'm always trying to use LINQ before I remember that's a C# feature. C# is really solid, especially .NET Core 3.1 and later.
I think that's unfair to the Streams API. It wasn't intended to solve the same problem as Linq and the problem it does solve it does very well. Streams transform collections. Streams API statements are usually elegant and the party piece of Streams is concurrency with parallelStream(), which will distribute stream operations across threads safely and transparently.
Perhaps java should have a Linq equivalent, but the fact that the Streams API isn't that isn't actually a knock on Streams. In the meantime there is JOOQ and others that deliver elegant query syntax with compile time type safety.
This sounds like a pretty serious misunderstanding of what LINQ is. LINQ is a general query capability of which there are multiple providers - one of them is for SQL, which may be what you are thinking LINQ is, but another is for in-memory enumerables ("LINQ to Objects"). LINQ to Objects and Java Streams actually are intended to solve the exact same problem.
If you think Streams API statements are elegant compared to LINQ, I again don't think you are familiar with LINQ. C# has language features Java does not have which usually makes LINQ much more succinct. For example, imagine a list of order items where each item has a double "Price" property. If you want to sum the price of all the items, here's how you'd do it in C# vs Java:
C#:
double sum = items.Sum(item => item.Price);
Java:
double sum = items.stream().mapToDouble(Item::getPrice).sum();
Java lacks extension methods, so stream() must first be called to get at any stream methods. Worse, Java has generic type erasure, so I have to to call "mapToDouble" to get this hacky concoction called a "DoubleStream" which actually has the sum method.
Not the end of the world, for sure, but definitely crappy compared to LINQ. There are lots of other irritating problems, such as Stream itself not being enumerable and the need for calling collect with a Collector.
Read the authors argument why they don't use Kotlin, a better language is not always nicer, especially when you risk being left behind. That is the reason why I don't touch C#.
Java has a massive community and a community that shares knowledge. This is what makes Java the greatest tool for any business.
It is a real threat. Is your app technically difficult to build? If it is then the threat is not as high as app that is easy to build but the idea is novel.
