Bossmang wrote a cursor prompt to pull tickets, their SLoC counts, and their average time to completion per dev, then praised or chastised accordingly.

You guessed it: no thought to complexity, code bloat, or scope creep. Just SLoC/day, days/ticket.

What won the statistics award is being assigned lots of small tickets /
tickets without scope creep, committing branches that don’t get merged, writing verbose spaghetti, using AI to write/rewrite large swaths of code, and simply moving large files.

Great job, dude! 💯🎉

Wow, managers can leverage AI to be just as fuckass stupid as before

I'd like to know whether the bossman is new && naive, new && naive && retarded, an ostensible senior... but retarded, or something else?

Either way yes - the guy's a moron.

Just commit a new prettier config or whatever Ruby uses for formatting every time you have to push changes so the diffs get huge

@D-4got10-01 Ostensibly a senior, but ugh, his code is ugly, and he never seems to have an answer when I ask him about really any area of the codebase.

According to him, he “just gets it done and [doesn’t] care about code cleanliness, finding elegant solutions, performance, etc. [He has] to force [himself] to revisit code and clean it up or [he] never would.”

He’s good at things like setting up Jenkins, though, or boring tasks like trawling through logs to figure out why something went wrong.

I thought most devs prefer less loc….less code less bugs less shit to read, this devs from a different planet

I had bad exp with get things done types bc their code was bug central, and i would have to delete their work and write my own shit bc their work looked “done” but wasn’t actually

"Measuring programming progress by lines of code is like measuring aircraft building progress by weight."

- Bill Gates

@Root At least he's good at something... But still it doesn't really sound like he should be in his managerial position, given his * cough * ideas.

I really hope you find another place... be strong.

Have you considered attaching an AI code reviewer to his code? That gives "constructive" critique?

Took me a while to find it, but I was reminded of this good one:

Source: https://devrant.com/rants/318346/... .

/* Whoa. Recursion. */

He should rate me by the number of eggs I have, I got 78 eggs delivered to me today on top of the 14 I had, fucking 92 eggs (87 now bc I had 5 for breakfast mmmm)

@D-4got10-01
Haha. That’s awesome. And really sad.

I might have to resort to shit like this, though less obvious since everything still needs to pass code review. But hey, I can just have Claude generate the code, since it usually produces huge unoptimized messes, and I get dinged for not “leveraging AI” enough. It’s perfect!

@Root Glad I could provide some inspiration. && yes - something less obvious would hit the spot.

...it's terrible that people have to resort to such measures because of the ways in which their performance is being calculated.

@Root Just assign every interim step to a variable, great way to bloat the code

Constant explicit null checks with braces

Multi-line constructor/function calls

I'm sure you'll figure out plenty more XD

I think generative AI is very good at generating useless code.

You just have to make some unit-test to verify every input-output is still what it's supposed to be.

@BordedDev My tickets have been 80% specs since. Eyeroll.

And the idiots still are terrified something might go wrong and demand I add multiple feature flags and allow them to change every single config value on the fly in case something starts crashing prod.

I mean, I can see why. They only hire DEI candidates now, and candidates “from cheaper countries”, and quality has gone to hell because they reward incompetence. Almost all of the code I see is garbage — especially from the seniors.

Hey look at me ranting again.
God, it’s all so tiring.