[eight_ender]

I don't argue your point here, but I'm seeing more and more developers that cut their teeth in the age of libraries that are terrified to touch library code.

There's an assumption out there for some that library code is flawless, and there's an imposter syndrome type aversion to touching it, with the developer fearing the code was made in a certain way for a certain reason and that they're not skilled enough to work on it.

This is made worse by the few brave developers that will dive in getting all the anger if they make a mistake, at a massive scale if the library is popular.

[yumaikas]

I suspect that the MS and Java tech stacks might factor into this a bit.

I can't speak for other languages, but in Go, the ability to navigate to the definition of any documented symbol via GoDoc has been most interesting for learning about how the sausage is made in certain areas. I don't have a comprehensive knowledge of all of Go yet, but I've learned that environment variables, for example, are backed by a `map[string]string`.

Perhaps something like that might help with the imposter syndrome about it?

[maccard]

I work on a closed source project using closed source libraries with some restricted source access. In general, if I find a bug in that library, it's less hassle for me to report it to them, and move on, than report it, fix it, and deal with the upgrade path later. It's unfortunate, but if I fixed every bug I found in the third party libraries, I'd never get any of my own work done..