After 10 years of programming I found that I can more and more relate to (good) detective movies, investigative journalism pieces and reading courts decisions and submissions (I have weird hobbies).
I learned that what works best is a systematic approach and what works badly is overlooking certain parts to save time based on intuitive assumptions.
I can't count the number of bugs that took me days because I've just jumped to the "heart" of the problem assuming the rest that got me there was fine. Only to have someone else looking at the problem with less knowledge, going through tings that seemed mundane but who finally gave valuable hints even if they were not problematic themselves.
I learned that what works best is a systematic approach and what works badly is overlooking certain parts to save time based on intuitive assumptions.
I can't count the number of bugs that took me days because I've just jumped to the "heart" of the problem assuming the rest that got me there was fine. Only to have someone else looking at the problem with less knowledge, going through tings that seemed mundane but who finally gave valuable hints even if they were not problematic themselves.