Okay, sure, do fast. Then:

• I’ll add a refactor task to the backlog filed under “tech debt”
• please confirm again that you know we are still behind on security updates and that you’re ok with it because you are responsible for how I spend my hours
• I’d like more time to spend on bugs before we lose customers.
• Also I won’t touch that buggy part without taking the time for a rewrite because we did it “fast” per your request and it’s so hard to maintain now that it becomes a time sink on every minor change
• I know we are under time pressure right now, but as a stakeholder I request we plan a few sprints for improving reliability of our product
• It’s not “fun” to work on our code. We might lose developers if we do not address this. We both know the good coders will have no problem finding a new job and you’ll end up with the bad ones.
• Either that, or plan for loss of personnel and the extra time we need for the hiring process and the loss of developer hours

Change management! :-)

Or, if possible, change employer.

(And I know we’re in meme-land, but I always see it as a developer’s task to inform of the trade-off between fast and good)

Don’t you need to declare new Balls() first? Or do you suck() Balls static?

I entered the world of Java a few years ago, there were already memes about eclipse back then, so I was prepared to prefer Intellij.

I tried both. Intellij is much more polished, it had some annoying bugs too, but the selling point for me was that eclipse was (is) really good at syncing every change directly to wildfly. This is a huge timesaver. The maven to eclipse plugin I think?

I’ve tried with jrebel but it’s not as quick and reliable as with eclipse.

I am fully prepared for a solution where Intellij is better so please let me know, but no one in our organisation (which has about 50 devs) has found it.

This … is actually quite accurate.

And for most cases this is perfectly fine!

Allergic to Indices? If your database is slow just add more Indices until you have one on every column of every table! :-)

No, the message is: you might do this and don’t worry, you’ll be fine :-)

Is it me or is there no link to click? I’m interested in your blog!

Mine isn’t

Lol, link gives an error right now but I have the image in my head so it’s okay :)

It is a lifesaver in some cases

I’m not sure if you really want to know, but:

greater than, smaller than, will cast the type so it will be 0>0 which is false, ofcourse. 0>=0 is true.

Now == will first compare types, they are different types so it’s false.

Also I’m a JavaScript Dev and if I ever see someone I work with use these kind of hacks I’m never working together with them again unless they apologize a lot and wash their dirty typing hands with… acid? :-)

edit: as several people already pointed out, my answer is not accurate. The real solution was mentioned by mycus