His vision of a "full stack developer" is a fairly reasonable one for software developers and engineers in general: specialise in at least one layer of tech, have at least a good understanding of the adjacent layers of tech, have some grasp of various layers of tech across the board, and also have a clue about business and legal concerns.

But by "full stack developer" other people have a different vision, i.e., one who is a specialist in all the layers of tech for which they would rather just hire one developer instead of hiring a specialist for each. Having someone who lacks expertise in some area cover it anyway may be necessary in the early stages of a new software house or when the developer needs to be an in-house generalist, but in the long run it may impede progress or even be harmful because developers simply cannot be expert in everything.

    I'll stick to PHP for now I guess, it's a long term idea maybe. Currently I go back and look at maxxd's php example every so often it's more readable now than before, is it only PHP you use or more than PHP?

      cluelessPHP;11055685 wrote:

      I'll stick to PHP for now I guess, it's a long term idea maybe. Currently I go back and look at maxxd's php example every so often it's more readable now than before, is it only PHP you use or more than PHP?

      Well, I wish it was just PHP, but the Force Is (too) Strong on The Client Side ... and they have cookies, too. :p

        dalecosp;11055713 wrote:

        Well, I wish it was just PHP, but the Force Is (too) Strong on The Client Side ... and they have cookies, too. :p

        hehe I know when we were been taught about cookies in class the teacher brought in cookies for us, it was a good day...free cookies 😃

        I can do 'some' clientside things but mostly very basic

          Write a Reply...