It’s been my experience as of recently. I point it at an issue tracker and ask it to investigate, write a test to reproduce the problem and plan a fix together. There’s lots of hand holding from me but it saves me a lot of work and I’ve been surprised by its comfort with legacy code bases. For now I feel empowered, and I’m actually working more intensively, but I was wondering to myself if I’m going run out of work this year. Interestingly, our metrics show that output is slowed by increased workload on reviewers.
Often, the clients of legacy code are old too, and are hard coded to access it.
I've done this, but on a private branch, with a single merge to trunk in the end. Starting with complex integration tests, new interfaces were gradually defined and made the code testable, giving me the needed confidence.
That’s an exaggeration. Oakland is actually a nice place.
My observation is that, in the eyes of progressives, working class folks and politicians, the city government and services are first a source of jobs, and services are secondary.
California protections against balance/surprise medical billing are not enforceable when an employee is covered by a "self-insured" or "self-funded" employer plan. California doesn't regulate that plan, and also cannot intervene in the billing between the provider, patient and insurance. Most medium to large employers are using such plans which means that employees are not protected from such billing.
"Does the New Law Apply to Everyone? The new law applies to people with health insurance policies or plans regulated by the California Department of Insurance or the California Department Managed Health Care that were issued, amended, or renewed on or after July 1, 2017. It does not apply to Medi-Cal plans, Medicare plans or “self-insured plans.”"
I wanted to join their previous Line effort, but re-read my insurance policy and found it falls under prohibited commercial driving. The terms now encompass any participation in online ride-coordinating services. Government needs to step in because individually the insurers have no incentive to allow this.
I guess any sort of trouble with the iPhone is an extremely minor thing in the grand scheme of things.
What to do about it? I can't presume to know what they tested and rejected, but screen orientation control needs to be independent of screen orientation.