Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Programming IT

Ask Slashdot: Are 'Full Stack' Developers a Thing? 371

"It seems that nearly every job posting for a software developer these days requires someone who can do it all," complains Slashdot reader datavirtue, noting a main focus on finding someone to do "front end work and back end work and database work and message queue work...." I have been in a relatively small shop that for years that has always had a few guys focused on the UI. The rest of us might have to do something on the front-end but are mostly engaged in more complex "back-end" development or MQ and database architecture. I have been keeping my eye on the market, and the laser focus on full stack developers is a real turn-off.

When was the last time you had an outage because the UI didn't work right? I can't count the number of outages resulting from inexperienced developers introducing a bug in the business logic or middle tier. Am I correct in assuming that the shops that are always looking for full stack developers just aren't grown up yet?

sjames (Slashdot reader #1,099) responded that "They are a thing, but in order to have comprehensive experience in everything involved, the developer will almost certainly be older than HR departments in 'the valley' like to hire."

And Dave Ostrander argues that "In the last 10 years front end software development has gotten really complex. Gulp, Grunt, Sass, 35+ different mobile device screen sizes and 15 major browsers to code for, has made the front end skillset very valuable." The original submitter argues that front-end development "is a much simpler domain," leading to its own discussion.

Share your own thoughts in the comments. Are "full-stack" developers a thing?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ask Slashdot: Are 'Full Stack' Developers a Thing?

Comments Filter:
  • by Craig Cruden ( 3592465 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @09:47PM (#56361309)
    Yes, there are full stack developers but as with any developer they may know how to code the full stack -- but they will typically be substantially stronger as a server/ messaging / or UI developer and thus much weaker on the other side. It is always better to have people that have a full understanding and the ability to step in if required (especially as you become more senior) of the full stack. If you have people that are purely silo developers - then you will often get into situations where your UI developer wants the server to take responsibility and your server thinks it is too frivolous for them and should be done in the UI.
    • The parent is spot on, specialization in our field should never mean exclusivity, it should just mean a strength. Being full stack is the only way to truly understand what it means to write simple, elegant code. Watching your too-clever-by-half solution go up in brittle, flaming bits as soon as you deploy it on the real platform teaches you a lesson you cannot learn in books, only by doing.

      The way to learn the full stack is on your own time, on your own projects, exploring whatever components tickle your fa

  • by whoever57 ( 658626 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @09:54PM (#56361323) Journal

    I know someone who has a liberal arts education (all the way to PhD) and then went to one of these coding boot camps. She now describes herself as a "full stack" developer, despite very little training and experience in the field.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      PhD stands for Phul stack Developer

    • Have you considered the possibility that she may be really smart?
      • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

        Smart does not defeat experience, ever, smart just means you learn fast, not that you automagically gain knowledge. Smart means you develop well based upon the experience you gain and that given sufficient experience, you will become really skilled, rather than just skilled.

        Full stack developers == cheap employer ie hire one person who can do everything (so the non-coder thinks) rather than hiring a bunch of people. Not only is a bunch far more productive, specialising in areas, I would separate code write

        • Wow, your post is hard to read. It's full of grammatical and spelling errors. Ever thought of hiring an editor? /s

          --
          • I guess editors are overrated.
            I saw no spelling error nor a grammar error.

            Perhaps you want to post a corrected post, so we all can learn from your insight?

            • by Memnos ( 937795 )

              Hmm. Reading rtb's post I was able to follow it fine. Then I read the Captain's post, went back, and yes there were some errors (e.g., "ie" with no punctuation, and a few other things that you typically just give a pass on in an internet post.) Then I read your post, went back and read both prior, and wondered if you had missed the "/s" in Quark's, then wondered what I might be missing in all three. Yeesh, I'm overanalyzing. Decided to skip it, get coffee. Then post-coffee, I figure I might as well post mys

  • 15 major browsers? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 110010001000 ( 697113 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @09:57PM (#56361329) Homepage Journal
    Who codes for 15 different browsers? No wonder you think it is so hard.
    • by raymorris ( 2726007 ) on Sunday April 01, 2018 @02:38AM (#56361949) Journal

      > 35+ different mobile device screen sizes and 15 major browsers to code for

      This shows he doesn't understand the entire POINT of html, a web browser, and CSS. He clearly doesn't know the difference between a PDF and an html document if he's coding for many different screen sizes with many different browsers. PDF files are sized - you can make a letter-sized PDF or legal-size, for example. The entire PURPOSE of a web browser, of the rendering engine, is to format *information* coming from the server to fit nicely in whatever size the window happens to be at the moment. If you're coding you're web pages for lots of different screen sizes, you're missing the entire point of what a web browser does, and your pages will be fucked when the window isn't maximized. *Maybe* two versions - small and large. Other than that, let the browser do its job. Don't try to force something to be exactly 3 pixels over by loading pixel.gif three times and you won't have to worry about screen size (or window size).

      Your html should describe *what* the page elements are, using tags like "header", "list (ul)", "top level heading (h1)". It's the browser's job to figure out how many pixels a top-level heading should be given the screen resolution, user preferences, etc. Your CSS then can give hints including "larger" which should generally apply to all devices.

      Code for 35 browsers? Try coding html 4 or html5. Not IEthml, and not loading pixel.gif five times when you detect Mozilla. Just code to the standard. If one of the three or four major browsers is completely broken in respect to the standard for some tag you can adjust for that, but those instances should be rare.

  • More than tools (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Luthair ( 847766 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @09:58PM (#56361337)

    "In the last 10 years front end software development has gotten really complex. Gulp, Grunt, Sass, 35+ different mobile device screen sizes and 15 major browsers to code for, has made the front end skillset very valuable."

    This is a silly statement, its like saying backend development is only difficult due to maven/ant. As someone who is a full stack developer (not only web but old style widgets), the vast majority of application code both front and back is plumbing / shuffling bits around, the amount that is technically difficult is diminishingly small.

    • by 110010001000 ( 697113 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @09:59PM (#56361339) Homepage Journal
      I think he means it is really complex because front end developers switch their development libraries every 3 months. It must be hell.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        This.

        What is the "Full Stack" at the end of the day? It's not really a 1-dimensional stack but a multidimensional field of platforms, devices, APIs, languages and methodologies, tools, backend, infrastructure sometimes even your own IT (I've had to swap RAM and CPUs out even as a developer). That world is also filled with the DevOps people that have (possibly) shallow but exceptionally broad experiences across all these domains with the odd specialization here and there. Those are the people that can find t

  • by bigman2003 ( 671309 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @10:06PM (#56361359) Homepage

    Hey! A post I love!

    I'm a full stack developer, and I think I do fairly well all around, but UI would be my weakest area, because that changes based on client needs.

    I think I am successful at working this way.

    The secret is, my 'stack' hasn't changed in 18 years.

    I keep upgrading, and I stay current within my stack, but I stick with what I'm doing.

    This is web work, so you're generating HTML and JavaScript, and CSS. That's it. The tools behind the scenes don't need to change every year. Find what works for you, and stick with it.

    Everything I work on, I have a lot of experience with. I may not be a hardcore DBA, but I have 18 years experience. My server admin skills aren't crazy...but 18 years. Same with the application layer....

    It's a cool job for me, because I care far more about the domain I work in (plants) than I do about finding the latest JavaScript framework.

    I haven't had a single request in the last 18 years to change any of the tools I use. But I get lots of requests where I really, really need to understand the science and logic of what my customer does. And I'd rather focus on that.

    That's my take on this...the technology is over-rated. What's really important is what you do with the technology.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Indeed. KISS rules and tools and technologies that work well should not be replaced. Then things stay nicely simple, reliable and fast and you can get the actual work done.

      But when you throw every new technological fad at it, then the technology becomes a difficult problem to handle in its own right. If you do that, you have failed on the onset of your work. Yet this seems to be the typical mode web-applications are designed these days. Everything must be flashy, graphical, interactive, etc. and it must be

    • by Mandrel ( 765308 )
      Does the UI part of full-stack include graphic design (images, layout decoration, and colours)? Many programmers don't have good skills in these areas, even though they are often good at designing UI layouts and flows.
      • Good question!

        I moved to web work in 1999 after a time in the printing industry. This was a natural outgrowth of realizing that printing was going to be affected by the web. So I had a lot of experience in print design.

        I do work with an artist, and at the beginning of a project we'll go over everything, determine a palatte of colors, they'll design the base CSS, etc. But I'm capable of extrapolating the design when something new comes along.

        My designs aren't great, and I should never START the design. T

  • by fabioalcor ( 1663783 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @10:07PM (#56361361)

    ... Overflow.

  • Tired in General (Score:4, Interesting)

    by countach ( 534280 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @10:13PM (#56361377)

    I'm tired in general of people who want to hire with super specific skill requirements. There is so many technologies out there that you end up faking 80% of the crap on your resume. I mean fair enough, if you want a Java developer, you want someone who did Java before. But apart from that, I'd rather hire on talent than specific skills.

    As an aside, as a matter of pure research, if you can only hire people on one data point, you're far better of hiring someone for ANY position based on IQ than any other factor such as qualifications, a good performance in the job interview, an impressive resume etc. That's just science. So it's pretty likely that if toss resumes in the bin, and forgo an interview and just give an IQ test, you'll actually get better employees.

    • by bigman2003 ( 671309 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @10:20PM (#56361399) Homepage

      I'd rather base it on EQ.

      I've seen high IQ people make bad decisions for really stupid reasons.

      Nothing wrong with high IQ- it's great. But I deal with mature code. I'd rather have people with wisdom than just intelligence.

      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        High IQ is a trap. Many people with it think because they are so smart, they do not need experience or actual understanding or actual learning. They end up being impressively mentally agile, but cannot produce solid solutions even for simple problems. On hard problems they often fail completely. And they typically have a selective blindness to that because they can argue anybody into the ground. High IQ, high opinion of themselves, no actually useful skills. High-IQ morons are a lot worse than low-IQ ones,

        • The biggest problem with many (not all) high IQ people is: they always assume everyone around them is super dumb. Regardless how intelligent the people around them are ...

          • In my experience, high IQ people don't assume other people are dumb, and I know people with pretty stratospheric IQs. If anything, assuming others are also highly intelligent is more likely the issue, but there are plenty of people with very high IQ aren't guilty of that either. What you seem to be describing is arrogance, which isn't correlated with intelligence in my experience.
            • That is an interesting point of view, but I don't fully agree. Perhaps many high IQ people are arrogant, but that would not make much sense either :D

      • by goose-incarnated ( 1145029 ) on Sunday April 01, 2018 @04:05AM (#56362053) Journal

        I'd rather base it on EQ.

        I've seen high IQ people make bad decisions for really stupid reasons.

        Nothing wrong with high IQ- it's great. But I deal with mature code. I'd rather have people with wisdom than just intelligence.

        EQ is a made-up thing that doesn't measure anything, because anyone with a slightly above-average IQ can game the test to tell the tester what they think the tester wants to know.

        You can't game the IQ test to get an IQ higher than you really have. You can game the EQ tests to say just about anything.

        EQ is part of the "new science" where there are no facts only opinions, and everyone gets a participation trophy. IQ is part of the old science where things remain true or false regardless of the faith behind it.

        • I dunno, I know a lot of workers who I'd describe as having a very low EQ which causes severe problems. As in the expert in a domain who loudly thinks he's the expert in every domain and has alienated everyone at the company who actively avoid meetings that he is in.

  • Front-end, simple? (Score:3, Informative)

    by DontBeAMoran ( 4843879 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @10:14PM (#56361381)

    The original submitter argues that front-end development "is a much simpler domain," leading to its own discussion.

    Clearly the original submitter has only ever done simple front-end development. Back-end code either works, or doesn't.

    Front-end code has to take into account multiple operating systems, multiple browsers, multiple versions of those browsers, hundreds of devices, an extremely wide range of processing power and RAM combinations... in short, your back-end code is a walk in the park.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      You must never have worked on the back-end where you have to be able to handle all the demented things the front-end "horde of incompetents" does and expects to work.

    • ... snipsnip...Front-end code has to take into account multiple operating systems, multiple browsers, multiple versions of those browsers, hundreds of devices, an extremely wide range of processing power and RAM combinations... in short, your back-end code is a walk in the park.

      That UI and BYOPOSSP (Bring Your Own POS Smart Phone) stuff is killer complex. Much harder than

      * JBoss and IIS load balancing for Apache or Tomcat
      * Supported configurations for AWS, Google Cloud or Rackspace
      * Full encryption for data at rest and in transit
      * Works with older version of Oracle (don't ask -- COTS product integration) and latest version of SQL Server
      * Nearly transparent switchover to/from DR (Disaster Recovery) data center with no data loss and minimal change in "end user experience

      • To be honest, a lot of those things are accidental complexity. At least in the back end you have the freedom to ditch the J-crap or I-crap if you *really* want. But of course there's legacy systems, so the world is not such a happy place after all and one has to tinker.
      • Harder? Maybe not. More frustrating unless you are using the right framework in the right way? Yes. More frustrating even if you are using the right framework in the right way? Yes. A pain to test sufficiently? Yes. A pain to keep up with the latest UI trend? Yes. UI dev pay seems like a case of paying for someone prepared to put up with a certain type of annoyance, but that seems to be true of many jobs, just different types of persistence required!
    • an extremely wide range of processing power and RAM combinations...

      You're doing front end design and trying to tailor it to processing power and RAM combinations? What are you doing? Mining bitcoin while sending database requests?

      You tailor to single combination: The slowest, and the people with faster equipment will thank you for not writing a bloated POS. Also if you're writing for a browser but are majorly concerned about the underlying OS then you're doing it wrong.

    • by angel'o'sphere ( 80593 ) on Sunday April 01, 2018 @05:46AM (#56362219) Journal

      That is nonsense on all accounts, front end code has nothing to do with processors, RAM, OS etc.
      And if you don't use a browser agnostic framework but code for every browser yourself: you are an idiot.

    • in short, your back-end code is a walk in the park.

      Unless the back-end code is more complex than the front-end code, because sometimes it's actually doing stuff. And considering that there is often some leeway in where you put certain things, well, if you *decide* to make the front-end complicated, of course it *will* be complicated.

  • Selective Hiring (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JimMcc ( 31079 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @10:20PM (#56361403) Homepage

    Ask for the world. Then you can choose not to hire somebody you don't want in the company (age, race, sex, hair color, etc.) because they don't meet the qualifications. HR has been doing this kind of things ever since discrimination became illegal.

  • especially since when they can't get it locally they get to apply for a visa and bring in somebody making 70-80% of the prevailing wages and work them 60 hours/week...
  • Yeah, I May Be One (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jimbrooking ( 1909170 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @10:40PM (#56361455)
    Am a retired volunteer. Started learning web technologies after I retired in 1999: ASP, MS Access, HTML and a little Javascript and SQL where I volunteered for a non-profit. Lately, have designed and developed a very interactive website for my homeowners association with extensive MySQL, PHP, CSS, JavaScript + jQuery, and custom HTML. I use an IDE (NetBeans). I don't claim to be the fastest coder in the world, but I have evolved my skills to use the programming tools needed to do what I want to do to keep my site interesting and useful to our community. I am 78 years old, reasonably healthy, and still learning: a survival strategy I'd recommend for anyone.
  • I used to be a "full-stack developer", as the term was just coming into use, and some folks still like to hold that banner high for me... but I loathe the whole concept, based on the experiences I've had to endure because of such "full-stack" idiots.

    The "full stack" includes the hardware, the OS, the database, the front-end, and all the middleware that makes it play nicely together. Even without the bemoaned complexity of modern frameworks, that's still a lot of ground to cover, and it has to be done right.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Well, "can do full stack" and "can do full stack competently" is a world of difference. Somebody for the first thing that can actually get things to work (a minimal requirement) is already hard to find. Finding somebody that can do it well, maintainable, clean and, foremost, actually understands KISS and respects it deeply is almost impossible to find. Yet unless you get that second type of person, the product that comes out of it will end up being very expensive and essentially must be thrown away after ha

  • A full-stack developer is a jack of all trades and master of none. I see job listings that have a far worse problem. For example, I saw an actual listing for a job that wanted a web programmer who could also: design for print and web, do photography and videography, create e-mail campaigns, handle social media, write content and documentation, and train users.

    They need four people but only got funding for one so they are looking for a unicorn. I have seen similar job listings over and over. The person is b

    • A full-stack developer is a jack of all trades and master of none.
      That is nonsense.

      If you are to dumb to do several things that all are centered around software development that is your problem.

      For example, I saw an actual listing for a job that wanted a web programmer who could also: design for print and web, do photography and videography, create e-mail campaigns, handle social media, write content and documentation, and train users.
      This is ofc an absurd requirement. But still I know people who exactly d

      • by Kjella ( 173770 )

        A full-stack developer is a jack of all trades and master of none.

        That is nonsense. If you are to dumb to do several things that all are centered around software development that is your problem.

        You think a doctor knows everything about medicine? A lawyer knows everything about law? Software development is a huge field, the only people who think they master all of it are wildly delusional. By all means I think I've dabbled in most things except maybe exotic things like GPU shaders, functional languages like Haskell/Erlang, NUMA architectures, real-time control systems etc. but I don't presume to master the rest.

        I can build whole applications but for example my UI skills are the "I know how to add a

        • The parent said: master of nothing ... so you are a master at some things. Not liking UIs does not make you a "non master" in other trades.

  • People who can code all aspects of an application exist. They are typically older, more experienced, more rounded, and the good ones can get paid a considerable amount of money, precisely because they can understand and effectively code all aspects of the "stack".

    What most companies are looking for are more unicorns: people who are young (ie: less external life, so they can/will work more), can code for all aspects of the stack well, single-handedly take projects to completion and/or coordinate between diff

    • by Tailhook ( 98486 )

      People who can code all aspects of an application exist.

      Well, I exist. Never occurred to me that managing the servers, databases, containers and writing the code at all tiers was special enough to deserve some designation. I just figured I was more willing than others to go where effort was required and learn what I had to learn. I guess I've been "full stack" since the late 90's.

  • Yup, me. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Space cowboy ( 13680 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @10:49PM (#56361487) Journal

    I am older, as the summary suggests - I'll be 49 this year, but these days I do:

    • verilog code on the FPGA, which talks to the
    • embedded micro (If there isn't one in the verilog or a hard macro on the FPGA), which is controlled by
    • the board-management micro, which talks to
    • the thunderbolt or lightning connector, which needs a
    • custom PCIe driver kernel extension on the host box (Mac or Linux), which wants a
    • user-interface library that applications will use to talk to the kext, and I provide a
    • GUI or shell app that exercises the hardware, and sometimes a
    • Full-blown application with complex threaded user-interaction which often needs
    • GPU accelerated display routines, which often use
    • OpenCL or Cuda routines for the heavy lifting

    I don't think of myself as a "full-stack developer", I just think of myself as a developer. The goal is to solve problems, the more tools you have at your disposal the better.

  • Yes, full stack developer is a thing.

    I donâ(TM)t expect any developer to be an expert at everything in the stack, but at least capable of installing their own tools, able to debug across layers with minimal help. (That doesnâ(TM)t mean none; I ask a fellow developer for input all the time. Itâ(TM)s to get a different perspective, and to influence his long term skills; but sometimes he points out things Iâ(TM)ve missed and learn something too.).

    You should be able to install your toolset,

  • Not really (Score:5, Insightful)

    by guruevi ( 827432 ) <`moc.stiucricve' `ta' `ive'> on Saturday March 31, 2018 @11:05PM (#56361537) Homepage

    There are good developers and there are bad developers. Once you know and understand the programming paradigm, you should be able to work on anything from Linux kernels to JavaScript apps in browsers.

    Now, you may not be as experienced in one or the other, so there will be a learning curve. If the company wants a "full stack developer" what they mean is that they want someone that, without a learning curve, knows the innards of all the technologies they have picked. If they want someone like that, they would probably try to retain and promote people that have worked there the longest, so a full stack developer should be virtually always an internal hire and practically at the level of team management.

    But bad managers at companies that don't understand technologies or how 'stacks' work, want a college grad that can quickly be thrown into multiple gaps they have and thus hire externally for "full stack developers" not even knowing what their own stack is and how a hire would have to fill it.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      There are good developers and there are bad developers. Once you know and understand the programming paradigm, you should be able to work on anything from Linux kernels to JavaScript apps in browsers.

      While I agree to that, maybe 1% of the coders on the market can actually do that. And I do not mean "do it well", I mean do it at all with some useful results. The following is still the sad state of affairs: https://blog.codinghorror.com/... [codinghorror.com]

      • by guruevi ( 827432 )

        I find that about 1% of IT people can do their jobs properly. Most "IT people" these days know enough to assemble a computer or set up a website and think they can get a sysadmin or programming job. Very few of them actually advance or want to learn anything beyond their basic skill sets.

    • I build the train, I drive the train. And when it breaks, I occasionally fix the train.
      And yes, that includes both the locomotive and the caboose.
  • by jythie ( 914043 ) on Saturday March 31, 2018 @11:08PM (#56361549)
    Well yes, 'full stack' exists, and it can work pretty well. It all depends on the project's needs. The OP is correct in that pretty much all layers of development have gotten more complicated and specialized over the years, but in a way they have also gotten simpler and less specialized too. The people who develop the various technologies have generally taken a 'minimum necessary complexity, scale up from there' approach which has made the barrier for getting useful functionality out of things pretty reasonable. A good full stack developer knows a few technologies from each layer well enough to link them all up and produce something that does the job. It will not be as fancy as something produced by a UI expert, or as high availability as something put together by a database expert, etc, but if the project does not actually need that level of design or fancyness then having a full stack person or two can get you what you need with the flexibility to shift people around.
  • 5-10 years ago when I heard "full stack", it meant that I could throw just about anything at you and you'd be well set to figure it out.

    These days over half of the developers I interview call themselves "full stack", and upon further digging maybe 10% of them meet my prior definition. It's the new buzzword.

    You can write Javascript and a stored procedure? It makes you full stack now - you don't even have to be very good at either of them. Most people draw a blank face when I ask what they've written that was

  • by WinstonWolfIT ( 1550079 ) on Sunday April 01, 2018 @02:09AM (#56361909)

    At 45+ I retrained into c# and made full stack in under two years, front end all the way to deployment, and I was far from the brightest of our bunch.

  • They reported that "full stack" development today is a term that is tied to the in-house server environment, and that in today's cloud environment, the extent to which the cloud manages itself means that programming for the "full stack" isn't nearly as difficult as it is for the on-premise computing and storage environment.

    • I completely agree with this. On-prem with an IT silo is HARD. I've spent weeks waiting for SQL or web deployments when I could spin up a cloud instance in minutes.

  • It's just an attempt to hire 1 person to do 4 different things.

    When you see list of requirements, it's ridiculous.. and it's getting longer every 2-3 years. At least if we're talking about Web Developers.
  • ... be an expert in every aspect of only one single field of those supposed to comprise the 'full stack', let alone an expert in everything within every field of the 'full stack'.

    As a good and experienced developer, though, you might have had the chance to look into several of those fields, and are, of course, able to learn what you do not yet know. As it is, a specific 'full stack' job can't possibly require every theoretically existing aspect within every field of the 'full stack', either.

  • When was the last time you had an outage because the UI didn't work right?

    Outright outage? Maybe not, but with a buggy or badly-designed UI, you just get a less spectacular, day-to-day loss of productivity due to improper/inefficient use of the system, tech support time wasted hand-holding users, mistakes made by operators and pissed-off customers... worst case: for a commercial product, people don't buy it. For a corporate system: users make the minimum use of the system they can get away with and rely on their own ad-hoc paper solutions and spreadsheets to get the job done - po

  • In my experience the people who need to know the "full stack" are the Support team, not the Dev teams. The Dev teams can be split (front-end, back-end, middle-ware for instance), but all these get 'merged' when handing over to Support (which has its own set of skill-sets).
  • Full stack is not that tough to get into, and pretty fun if you're into designing. You can get pretty good practice by using a simple Python webserver like CherryPy and SQLite as a backend, which obviates the need for installing a full LAMP stack.

    The most tricky part IMO is keeping up with all the Javascript libraries out there. However, if you learn jQuery and maybe a data display library like D3 or a higher level charting library you can do pretty cool stuff with fairly minimal code.

  • Full Stack means you know your way around correct front-end, correct back-end, correct software architecture and a solid setup that can stand on it's own once the project moves from development into maintenance/"dev-ops". This usually means that you focus on a specific set of technologies, and don't get too much into others in detail.

    Here's a nice example:
    By chance and circumstance I happen to be doing quite a bit of PHP for a living. I started before Node and kinda got stuck with it. I haven't gotten round to building mission critical Node stuff yet, but there also are some things about Node and some about PHP that actually have be favour PHP, despite it being a language developed by monkeys on crack [slashdot.org]. I also know my way around JS, Ajax, DB Design, OOAD, Linux CLI, Tooling, Load-balancing and some other stuff. Ask me about intrinsict details on JS or PHP I might be out of my depth or jump straight to stackoverflow, but therefore I don't make a fool of myself when I need to pick a font or a color palette or design a basic pageflow and layout. I can also tell with quite some certainty wether someone at any tier of the stack knows what he is doing or not.

    Hence: I'm pretty much what you would call a senior full-stack web-developer.

  • by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Sunday April 01, 2018 @09:20AM (#56362643)

    The Germans have something like that, it's called an egg-laying-wool-milk-pig.
    They are very rare and their eggs are small, the wool is sticky, the milk sour and the pork awful.

    You know the ole 'master of none' thingie.

  • by Murdoch5 ( 1563847 ) on Sunday April 01, 2018 @10:57AM (#56362915)
    I'm a full stack developer, I can and do write code in the embedded landscape with C, ASM (Several Arch's). I write back-end code with PHP, C, C#, Node.JS, Erlang, Scala, and some others. I write code in the front-end with JavaScript, Angular, React, GTK#, C#, C, GTK, and some others and I work with Databases, SQL (only when required as it's crap), MongoDB, and some node based DB's.

    Part of my past job was to write and maintain a stack that included an Embedded Firmware, Database, Back-end globally distributed system, Front-end System on the Web and Desktop and I wrote a full testing framework for that system. There are defiantly full stack developers and they have a place, BUT, they're also a place for non full stack developers who specialize at a Jedi Ninja level in one area and rock it so hard, it's basically another Woodstock.

Ya'll hear about the geometer who went to the beach to catch some rays and became a tangent ?

Working...