because he felt that the ratio was

[rifattryo.ut11]

It is only used as a reference and example. Don't be too serious. The standards mentioned above are actually the same for both products and development. Products are from being usable to being easy to use to being desirable, and development is from being usable to being stable to being continuous. But once you start to mess up, the so-called ambition will disappear. Specifically speaking, the things made are very "makeshift" and very "rough". That is, you say it has it, it does have it, but when you really use it, it feels very awkward and always makes you feel that it is missing a breath.



Let's take an example. One is the backend function and japan code number telephone the other is the frontend function. Let's talk about the backend first. Our venues often need to issue fixed coupons to certain fixed users. The fixed period may be weeks, months, or years. Anyway, it is not fixed but relatively not so flexible. When this requirement was first proposed, I thought there would be a scheduled task to automatically issue coupons to this group of people regularly. I also evaluated it according to this expectation. After the first coupon issuance, everyone thought that this function was completely K.



But after about a week, someone reported to our staff that there were no coupons recently and they could not enter the venue to use them. Finally, after understanding it, it turned out that the backend did not have the function of automatic issuance at all, and it was all issued manually. So now it has been more than half a year and he is still issuing coupons manually. Every time he seems very busy, but every time he does not solve the fundamental problem, he is doing repetitive work. Let's talk about the frontend.