Ok going to rant about other developers this time.

Can you please stop doing just the minimal amount of work on your games/apps?!

I understand you may not have the time to go through with a fine tooth comb but just delay it, delay it and finish the product to a state that doesn't feel half assed and broken right at the get go.

A small note that the thing that triggered me with this is Android Devs at the moment, with Google requiring you support the adaptive icons and a newer SDK, so many Devs are just scraping by and putting in no effort to bring things up to date (also put more effort into adaptive icons rather than just putting your old square Icon on a white background)

This shit is just leading to everything being 'early access' or in a constant 'beta' stage with the promise of polish later.

Don't be that guy, put the extra few days of polish in... Just please...

Cheating the system, huh?

>>with Google requiring you support the adaptive icons<<

Haven't been really active around that, but what's the difference to them just usually automatically rendering a transparent icon in a (preferably) app icon color container background?

also what kind of changes could they do that are half-arsed to bring the app up to SDK, which are visible?

@JoshBent good point but I suppose it sort of defeats the purpose of adaptive icons and would just leave more crap that OEMs won't include or will remove.

And removing now deprecated API's that are prone to breaking, no longer working or causing instability.

And oh shit someone follows me... I feel honoured *bows head*

In my opinion, the polish takes disproportionately much time. I know that because I'm somewhat of a perfectionist. At work, I have to make compromise with the schedule, but with my private project, I have no limits - and it shows in how much time goes in for things that only few users (if any) will ever notice.

One thing that my users do notice, though, is how rock stable my shit is.

@Fast-Nop you sir arent the hero we deserve, but the one we need

Oh, and something that makes me a bit sad.. mostly when I report bugs in OSS projects, they just get ignored. Since I'm dev myself, I know how to make useful bug reports.

Actually, I have only one incident where the other dev cared, and we worked out the bug together. And that although the resulting binary did work, but he cared as much about undefined behaviour as I do, even if it seems to work.

Otherwise, I only can use bug reports for reference why my own stuff contains strange workarounds.

I have even made code reviews with advanced toolchains (fucking expensive shit!) for people who were asking why their stuff doesn't work, but they were only interested in the immediate symptoms, not in making their stuff robust.

What irks me especially is the stance that "this cannot happen, and if it does and my program crashes, maybe with security hole, it's other programs' fault". Holy shit.

@Fast-Nop "advanced toolchains" - which?

@JoshBent Regularly for my private project: Coverity Scan, which is actually for free for open source projects (on top of CppCheck, which is very nice but not advanced IMO).

But for a time, I had my hands on an gratis eval licence of CodeSonar that I evaluated at home for my company. My company got the evaluation on my unpaid time, and I could unleash that tool on my private stuff and some other con-commercial projects, that was a good deal.

CodeSonar is quite expensive, but holy shit is that tool good. It can track shit over different functions. And, if configured properly, even race conditions.

@JoshBent Are you also in love with static code analysers?

Btw, an example what that thing caught. There was a nested for loop. Some macro heavy bool logic operations on a loop index, then some binary logic stuff. The result of that was used as a shift width for an unsigned 64 bit integer - but that calculated shift width could be 64 in SOME loop runs, which is undefined behaviour in C.

CodeSonar spotted that. Incredible! And they don't "run" the code, they hook in at compilation stage. Means, it also works for cross-compiling.

I'd say that if dev and testing cost Western salary, that tool is worth buying because of the time it saves with bug hunting and retests. We finally bought that in my company, that's how I also know their support. That's also expensive, true, but you get what you pay for.

@Fast-Nop I haven't done any low level analysis for a long time, but it's very interesting to me :)

@Fast-Nop looking into it right now, really great tool

@JoshBent I'm using that for C, but they have also other languages.

Unfortunately, they don't give eval licences to private devs. Only for companies, but they are easy on that. The eval thing is fully functional, just time limited.

Usually, I don't "spam", but that tool really hit me, especially after I have been frustrated with the Lint crap that drowned me in silly false positives.

Oh, and their support, I forgot to mention - it's good because you don't get the "did you reboot" people. You get a tech fellow deep in the know from the get-go. No BS. They also help with customising things.

@Fast-Nop if I'd ever actively need it, I could get the license one way or another, also don't mind the "spam" it's quite interesting

@JoshBent thx - ok, it's at least some tech talk again. :-) I'd also link you my project page if it weren't under my real name.

@Fast-Nop in case you'd be comfortable sharing it over email: {email}

@JoshBent did it work?

@Fast-Nop just checked, good that you asked, it landed in spam for whatever reason, thanks I'll look into it asap :)

Yes, totally agree with you, but you're missing a freaking important part of the story... Unless you are talking exclusively about "I am the boss" devs, there's always some dumb fuck sales/manager/product owner that's risking a great product because of deadlines