Personally, I know some really great "full stack" engineers who can move between the front end and back end fairly well, but they are few and far between. All of the developers where I currently work, besides our two front end guys, are considered "full stack" and I would definitely NOT consider any of them "full stack". Just because they know how to use Razor to pull data in from a .NET model and use a little jQuery for some form validation, then sprinkle some random Bootstrap classes on it and call it a day doesn't mean they understand how the front end works. On the flip side, just because I can add some logic to a controller and update a model/DTO, doesn't mean I'm "full stack", either.
I see this a lot in new job listings. The term "full stack" is the new term for "back end" at a lot of companies, which becomes deceiving. I see full-stack as a senior/architect level position. Someone with enough knowledge in key areas who can build an entire MVP by themselves without needing the help of another. It might not be perfect in all areas, but it will be functional enough for a specialist to come in and polish it on the next iteration.
The full stack dev is the person you assign to build a new product proof of concept, so you don't have to pull multiple resources from other tasks. Building an entire team out of true full stack devs is difficult and probably the wrong way to go about your business. Most good devs will have enough knowledge on both sides to talk each other's language and make simple edits, and if they don't, the knowledge can be picked up fairly easily. This does not necessarily make someone "full stack", this just makes you a competent developer.
Max is a startup software engineer. He seeks to use what he has learnt as a startup founder and tech community leader to solves hard problems with innovate products or services.
Personally, I know some really great "full stack" engineers who can move between the front end and back end fairly well, but they are few and far between. All of the developers where I currently work, besides our two front end guys, are considered "full stack" and I would definitely NOT consider any of them "full stack". Just because they know how to use Razor to pull data in from a .NET model and use a little jQuery for some form validation, then sprinkle some random Bootstrap classes on it and call it a day doesn't mean they understand how the front end works. On the flip side, just because I can add some logic to a controller and update a model/DTO, doesn't mean I'm "full stack", either.
I see this a lot in new job listings. The term "full stack" is the new term for "back end" at a lot of companies, which becomes deceiving. I see full-stack as a senior/architect level position. Someone with enough knowledge in key areas who can build an entire MVP by themselves without needing the help of another. It might not be perfect in all areas, but it will be functional enough for a specialist to come in and polish it on the next iteration.
The full stack dev is the person you assign to build a new product proof of concept, so you don't have to pull multiple resources from other tasks. Building an entire team out of true full stack devs is difficult and probably the wrong way to go about your business. Most good devs will have enough knowledge on both sides to talk each other's language and make simple edits, and if they don't, the knowledge can be picked up fairly easily. This does not necessarily make someone "full stack", this just makes you a competent developer.
Yeah I agree that building a entire team out of full stack is ridiculous.
Most of time when you look further into the job.
It will be specific skills sets for either the frontend or backend to build MVP.