That's a good point. The app actually uses an openid-connect library on the client side for OIDC flow with the authorization server. Since the apps delegates the flow to the library it does not have a full control over error handling.
Yes, I am going by both breadth and depth wise. For breadth wise, I am trying to understand how different pieces fit into the whole system. Absolutely, for learning the core concepts, I am going through the official doc as well.
Which books do you recommend ? Are there any other courses out there to ramp up learning ?
Seeking Co-Founder | AI/ML/LLM | Toronto / Remote | Pre-Seed
I am working on some ideas that leverage the recent development in AI/ML esp. Large Language Models. I am exploring to use https://github.com/microsoft/semantic-kernel and similar technologies to develop apps with AI first mindset.
I highly recommend this book if you want to know more about John Von Neumann and his contribution to some of the most influencing topics of today's world including Game Theory, Quantum Physics, Electronic Computer, Hydrogen bombs etc.
This book is also great for history lovers since it also delves into the period of post World War II when the best of the brains started migrating to US from Europe and influence major national defense and security projects.
It's amazing to see how Von Neumann is able to move from one hard topic to another and make an impact.
StrongVPN, Mullvad, hmaproxy, etc... Even Tor provides sort of the same thing.
But it really depends on use case. Why do you need a VPN -- until you answer that question, you can't really make an informed decision on which vpn you need.
When a development team is following XP Principles, mostly two developers are doing Pair Programming with Test Driven Development (TDD) and rotating pairs every week, how much value will it add with code review ? We recently had a discussion where some of us think it is still good to skim through the change request by a second pair while other's think it's just a waste of time.
I am curious to know if code review is encouraged by a second pair in following XP practices ?
The point of reviewing code is to get a second set of eyes on it, partly for perspective and partly to keep you honest. Pair programming is almost strictly better.
The tradeoff is that you've now effectively made the reviewer a full-time participant in the development process, which is much more of a resource drain than a code review role would have been. This may end up being a very wise investment, but smarter people than me have strong opinions on both sides of that one.
At Google if person 1 and person 2 pair, then one can be the official author, and one can be the reviewer. Depending on the people and the change, they may also ask for review from others as well.
Good point. At our company, we try to always assign two devs to more complex tasks, the actual developer and a "feature buddy". They don't actually PP the entire thing, but they discuss the strategy in pairs before starting to code and clarify question along the way in pairs. When the feature is done, the buddy will already have a very good idea about the feature and already agree with the fundamental decisions that were made along the way.
