DEV Community

Discussion on: No, it is not shameful for a developer to use No-code

Collapse
 
karthik2206 profile image
karthik2206

What do we do when some library has a bug?

We try to find a solution ourselves, reach out on StackOverflow, find a workaround, etc. I think the same applies for NoCode too.

I get your point in that there are more dependencies than in traditional code. But I believe that NoCode is still in the early part of its growth and it surely doesn't make sense all the time. But as I said in the above comment, for a large set of first-version products, it does an amazing job.

The idea is to be open to considering it as one of the options you have on the table. Personally, it has allowed me to outsource a lot of the debugging and feature addition to other non-tech people in the team. I don't have to always be the one to debug and add stuff.

Collapse
 
crivion profile image
Alex Crivion

You don't deploy a library with a bug: that's why testing exists.
Anyways, I get your point and as earlier said it works as a starter solution but the more you earn $$ it'll become a headache and you really need something which is under your control. No offence, just my point of view.

Thanks