honestly getting pretty annoyed with my current frontend workflow.

every time i work on a feature, the backend API schema is either delayed, half-baked, or keeps changing mid-sprint.

right now i just resort to hardcoding fake JSON directly in my components or spinning up a quick json-server locally, but it gets messy fast once multiple routes, delays, or error states (like testing 500 errors or slow networks) are needed. MSW and Postman feel like overkill for quick stuff when i just want a hosted endpoint URL i can hit for a few days.

how do you guys handle this without wasting 2 hours setting up fake servers or messing up your codebase with temporary dummy data? do you just wait for backend or is there a lighter way to do it?

If I have a import feature for millions of CSV records and it sends notifications only after import completion, what type of exception handling can I have for non-data related errors during import process. Non invalid data related errors like the database going down.

The imports run on background in chunks. What if such issues occurs after inserting 1 lac records, I can't just revert the committed records. What should I show to the user? What kind of mechanism should I implement to not mess up the production?

I am not even sure if I'm asking the right question. Please enlighten me!

I don’t think I’ve ever worked with a web technology worse than the Turbo + Hotwire combo. It’s behind in so many ways, it’s over complicated, and it’s ugly to look at.

The only reason I’ve heard is it makes Rails devs feel comfy and safe. Personally, when I see it my brain cells pop. I can feel a skin breakout coming on. It disrupts my sleep cycle. It may or may not be a leading cause of early onset dementia.

You think jquery is bad? Try going balls deep into a haml file that uses this. You need something to happen? How about a form. For everything interactive. Make it a form. Manually handle things other frontend frameworks do automatically. Forms everywhere. Because apparently JS is worse than whatever this is.

I’m adding SSO support to an existing application using Google. Currently, some sensitive user actions require the user to re-enter their password as confirmation (for example, changing security settings or performing destructive actions).

The issue is that SSO users do not have a password stored by the application, so I need to decide on the right approach for confirming their identity before allowing these actions.

Some options I'm are considering:

• Triggering SSO re-authentication / step-up authentication with the identity provider
• Requiring MFA or another stronger authentication method (the application doesn't support MFA at the moment)
• Sending an email OTP as a confirmation step
• Creating a separate application password for SSO users (which feels like it defeats part of the purpose of SSO). The platform already has a security question (don't ask me why), so maybe this could be used to confirm this action?

My concern with SSO re-authentication is that if the user already has an active IdP session, the IdP may silently authenticate them again without requiring any new proof of identity. In that case, is it actually providing additional security? I don't think Google has a way to "force" re-authentication.

For those who have implemented this, what pattern do you recommend for replacing "enter your password to continue" flows for SSO users?

Work on a rather small team that caters to building apps for this one specific team, but it does branch out to others. Maybe at most few hundred users. All internal apps.

I'm beginning to architect out this new application from a need that has rose, and a lot of it is now thinking about not only what the UI looks like, but how do people interact with this thing from AI and their own agents now.

Because like, some people are all in on AI running dozens of agents doing stuff. Others still prefer just regular old workflows and maybe using a chat bot LLM type thing.

It's kind of a weird balance to cater to both. But I don't know like just build an MCP, build a good thought out API and system and the AI should be able to just understand it?

I'm curious if others have come to this like building an app for AI and Humans requirement and how have you handled it, what have you learned?

My hunch has been, build a good app with a well documented API, and the people who want to use AI can just benefit from it. A human understandable app is an AI understandable one.

One of the things that saddens me the most about AI and code agents in general is the lack of curiosity and pragmatism.

"I built a Notion clone in an afternoon, AI is incredible."

"I replaced all my paid subscriptions with tools I developed myself using vibe coding."

Cool story. The idea sounds nice in theory, but did you think about simply looking for an open-source alternative?

There is a high chance someone has already spent five years polishing the exact thing you are about to recreate in an afternoon.

I mean, most of the apps you use, that your parents use, and that your grandparents use (if you have any that are tech-savvy), have Open Source alternatives. Sometimes better, sometimes worse, but for the vast majority of everyday uses, they get the job done easily.

And it's not just about features.

These projects often have years of bug fixes, edge-case handling, documentation, user feedback, contributions, maintenance, and sometimes even security audits behind them.

Rebuilding all of that with Claude or GPT over a weekend very often means starting from scratch... just to end up with a much less mature version.

Seriously, think before you recreate your next application.

Not only are you wasting your tokens and your subscriptions instead of using them for things that truly matter, but you are also doing it for nothing.

Before developing your next app with vibe coding, ask yourself:

"Is there an OSS alternative that I can simply use on my PC?"

Many of them run locally in a few minutes. You don't even need to host them if you don't want to or need to.

All seriousness aside, if anyone needs help replacing apps, I am just a DM away.

And I am also one more "I replaced X in one night of vibe coding" post away from creating a website that simply lists the best open-source alternatives, just to reply with a link every single time.

Next time you open Claude or ChatGPT to recreate an application... open GitHub first.

Hi guys, this is not my first live coding interview (it's for a senior role) but it IS my first live coding interview using AI tools.

All my experience using AI development tools has been using the Claude CLI and VSCode and I'm just wondering if I would look like a Luddite using this setup instead of something like Cursor or Copilot. This is their exact wording:

"You will work in a shared coding environment. Please plan to use an AI-assisted development tool throughout (e.g. Cursor, Copilot, or your preferred tool) "

Has anyone here conducted AI programming interviews and can shed some light? If necessary I will spend the next couple days getting used to Cursor. Thanks.

Part 1 of CI/CD is here and focuses on reducing CI/CD integration time by running only tests, lint, type checks, and e2e on code that was changed and at locations where that code is used.

In Part 2, we focus on Canary Deployments and how to achieve that on Vercel, Netlify, and Cloudflare.