Is it true that here are no actual full stack developers in 2019.

twitter logo github logo ・1 min read

I came across this tweet this morning.

What do you think?

twitter logo DISCUSS (12)
markdown guide

Yes and no...

Yes, the stack is too large for one person. There is more technology than anyone could know in enough depth to cover the "full" stack.


I consider myself a full stack developer. I have professionally used a solid range of technologies ranging from a number of different databases, serverless technologies, build a number of api's for a range of content and (my favourite) created complex and responsive front-ends in a range of frameworks.

I will openly say I don't know Vue or Google Cloud. I have no real experience with any Angular post AngularJs or many of Azure's newer features. Then sites like DEV are built on Ruby... But I could learn any of them in a short time span to an acceptable level if needed. The underlying technologies and principals are the same.

So yes, if your definition of full stack is knowing every possible technology, no matter age or market share.. then yeah, there are no full stack developers. However that isn't my definition or the definition of most of the companies out there recruiting full stack.


I believe you don't have to know everything to be considered full stack. You define your own stack and fill it.


In my opinion, a fullstack developer should have capability to do a project alone.


But to what standard?

A lot of devs could make a passable attempt at every part of a solo project, but I could count on one hand the number of people I've met who I'd consider capable of producing a professional result in all aspects.

I think people have different definitions of what a full stack developer is.

I say as a full stack developer you can develop every part of the project but it doesn't mean that you have to because most developers work in teams.

You also define the stack you want to be full in.


I tend to think of full stack devs as engineers who build products across the stack using infrastructure created by backend, frontend, data and dev ops engineers. For example a full stack engineer will use UI widgets, frontend frameworks and build processes created by frontend engineers, but might not be involved much in creating and maintaining the infrastructure they use.


Depends on the stack.

No-one forces you to build a rocket-ship-stack.

Fx. LAMP and MEAN stacks are very manageable.
With hosted container services they are also very easy to set up.

Even in a high volume environment, you can cheat with caching services like Cloudflare or Akamai. Making even that manageable to learn for a single person.

So i would say he is wrong.
Granted it does take a lot of time to learn all the tools.


Sounds reasonable. You own your own stack. So you become a full stack in your own right.


If people are into the habit of constantly adding things to the stack then that's true. Even for true full stack developers. While a full stack doesn't strictly mean they can do every possible conceivable thing, it usually does mean so within the core technical stack and more specifically it means they're able to quickly learn when confronted with unknowns.

There's some debate about artwork. It's usually not considered but some do include things like webdesign and that is relevant for certain customers. Quite a few people that fall into the full stack definition technically, including myself, do not excel as much with web design. It's not that I can't do it but that you'll laugh at the results.

In most cases when things are added on to the stack ad nauseum then it's not down to real requirements but more like someone window shopping on an unlimited budget adding everything that catches their eye to their mental basket.

The traditional concern with full stack is getting a jack of all trades master of none. Some people really are able to maintain a much better than average standard in multiple disciplines.

It's very relevant to startups and other ventures with restricted budgets. If you can hire one person instead of five then it can be very effective as long as they do cover the bases. Stack is defined by the circumstances though to have meaning it usually involves more than one major layer of the system. Realistically, a few major layers.

There is also an advantage. One person can get things done very quickly as they can switch over to for example configuring something they need on the server immediately rather than having to explain it to another person who might not be presently unoccupied. People very often overlook the overhead of spreading a task across multiple people. They don't need to sit around waiting for the DBA to create a table.


This is a well thought out response and I think you are absolutely correct. I like the way you put it across.


My thoughts on the issue.

Classic DEV Post from Jun 1

Demystifying Open Source Contributions

Kudakwashe Paradzayi profile image
Extreme Programmer 👨‍💻 × Fullstack Javascript Developer 💪🏽 × Hackerman 😎

Need dark mode?

DEV has themes, font config, and lots more for signed-in accounts.

Create Your Account