Hi, I'm

Jeremiah Flaga

I'm a software developer, with over seven years of experience, including:

  • About seven years of experience in C# & .NET Framework (this includes experience of using JavaScript for the frontend side)
  • More than one year of experience in mobile application development using Java & Android Platform
  • Some experience on refactoring code and writing tests

What can I contribute to your project?

Please visit my online resume at jeremiahflaga.github.io/resume for more...

Skills / Technical Knowledge




Other Languages:

Java, JavaScript, TypeScript, Python

Web (frontend):

HTML, Bootstrap, Angular

Databases, ORM:

SQL, Entity Framework

Software Architecture/Design:

The SOLID principles

The Clean Architecture of Uncle Bob Martin

Working with Legacy Code:

"The Right Attitude to Deal with Legacy Code" by Jonathan Boccara

I had read "Working Effectively with Legacy Code" by Michael Feathers last 2018

The majority of the code bases I have been involved in since I started working as a programmer were legacy code bases.


Googling Stackoverflow :grin:

I read.

GitHub: github.com/jeremiahflaga

I read "How to Win Friends and Influence People" years ago.

(I included this here because this might give me plus points... because I saw a job post in the past which said that this book is a required reading if one is hired.)


April 2012 - October 2012 (6 months)

Software Developer (.NET)

I experienced being in a team working as outsource developers for another company, building contest pages for www.verizoninsider.com.

Nothing extraordinary. Just finished the tasks assigned to me.

This is where I was first exposed to this idea of Domain-Driven Design (DDD). I was excited with this because I have always been in search for the best way to structure software, and this DDD thing seems to offer ideas on how to do it.

Our employer made us read some articles about DDD because we will be using it in an in-house project. But I was not lucky to be involved in the in-house project because the employment of three junior developers, which included me, ended after six months due to a problem unbeknownst to me.

I just saw the initial structure of the project. I saw that there was a Core module, which I now understand to be the module which holds the business rules. There was also an Infrastructure module(s), which holds the data layer, the email service, and some other parts of the system. There was no presentation layer yet during the time that I saw the project. But it had unit tests.

December 2012 - May 2016 (3 years, 5 months)

Software Developer (.NET)

I was part of a team working for a client who develops apps for insurance companies. We were involved in the maintenance of a web app and a desktop app used for insurance enrollment and insurance records management.

Nothing extraordinary. Just finished the tasks assigned to me.

  1. I started to understand what Object-Oriented programming is.

    (When I applied for this job, I claimed to know OOP. But I later realized that I really did not know OOP. I only knew about what a class is, what an interface is, what an abstract class is, what polymorphism is, but I did not not yet have a full understanding about their purpose.)

    This is where I started to understand the Dependency Inversion Principle, the use of the Factory design pattern, and other things.

  2. I learned that programmers at this level of their carreer needs lots of guidance/mentoring from their seniors, most especially when the project is in a complex state already, and if the seniors don't want the juniors to mess with the code. :grin:

    (When I become a senior developer someday, I intend to guide/mentor my teammates who are in the beginning years of their carreer... provided of course that they also share some of their knowledge with me. :blush:)

  3. Also, I think it will be helpful to give from time-to-time some readings or lectures about the domain of the system being maintained by the programmers, so that it will not be very hard for them to understand the parts of the codebase where knowledge of the domain is needed.

  4. This is the time where I, and my teammates, plunged into the Clean Code book because one of our team leads made us read one chapter of the book each week, and spend about an hour each week discussing that chapter.

    Unfortunately, for reasons unknown to me, our discussions stopped after a few meetings. We did not finish the book. We only discussed up to chapter five, if I remember it correctly. And I read up to chapter 8 only of the book. :disappointed:

    But I learned a lot from the chapters which I read.

  5. This is where I experienced writing unit tests after-the-fact, that is, after the production code is already written. — It was hard.

    There were parts of the system that were somewhat easy to test. But there were parts that were hard to test. Those parts that were hard to tests? — those that used DateTime.Now, and static methods, and extension methods of C# (which basically are still static methods), those parts that use (what I now know as) Service Locator — I skipped testing them :smiling_imp:. Of course I first tried to look for ways on how to test those things...

    I think the time I spent writing those tests was a waste of time :grin:, partly because there were parts of the system that I skipped testing (because I did not know how to test them), and partly because I did not have the goal of using the tests to make the design of the system better at a later time, which is supposed to be one of the reasons for writing tests for an existing software. I did not know yet that sometimes it is necessary to change production code to make them testable — something I learned later on after reading books such as "Working Effectively with Legacy Code", and after learning more about TDD.

    Don't get me wrong here. I don't hate unit testing. During that time, I already have an appreciation on the benefits of having unit tests — it had been three years already since I first heard about unit testing and TDD during that time.

    I think I should have told my team leads about my opinion that writing those tests was just a waste of time. Had I told them about it, they might have explained to me why those tests should be written, and they might have helped me look for ways to write tests for the untestables that I encountered. But I was very timid during that time and was afraid to express my opinions.

    But despite that experience, I'm not against writing tests. I am even a TDD advocate today through the influence of Uncle Bob Martin. But writing tests after the production code is already written requires a somewhat different skillset than doing TDD. I was, and is still, not skillfull on writing tests after-the-fact. But I'm trying to be good at it also.

March 2 - 4, 2016

Enlightenment Period

I read and studied Uncle Bob Martin's blog post titled "A Little Architecture".

I would say that this is the time of my enlightenment on how to structure software projects.

"Architecture is not about frameworks and databases and web servers..."

Before this time, I thought architecture is about how to combine all these frameworks together to form an application!

  • Windows Forms for presentation | ADO.NET for data access | SQL Server for database | etc.

  • ASP.NET Web MVC for presentation | Entity Framework for data access | etc.

  • Hot Towel SPA Template for frontend | ASP.NET Web API for backend | Entity Framework for data access | StructureMap as DI Container | SQL Server for database | etc.

... did I place much of my time and attention in the wrong places!?... I'm not sure. Perhaps this is just part of growing up as a programmer through trial-and-error, with no one personally guiding you. :grin:

"The important decisions that a Software Architect makes are the ones that allow you to NOT make the decisions about the database, and the webserver, and the frameworks." — Uncle Bob Martin

Of course I understand that the peak of an enlightenment comes from a series of little enlightenments. So even though this article of Uncle Bob is very special to me, I acknowledge that there are lots of other materials (and experiences) that helped me come into this kind of enlightenment.

I have always been in search for the best way to structure software systems. Now I think I already know the gist of it:

just do your best to separate the business rules from the other parts of the software system.

October 2016 - May 2018 (1 year, 7 months)

Software Developer (Android)

Involved in developing versions 2 and 3 of an Android app for a TV show.

Nothing extraordinary. Just finished the tasks assigned to me.

But this time, because I already have a better understanding of polymorphism (and its use), and the SOLID principles, and other things related to software design, I tried to use these knowledge in my coding.

  1. I learned how to work on a Java platform.

    Before this job, I only knew how to do real world apps using .NET.

    Doing Android made me more confident that I can also do work on other platforms. (Big thanks to my employer for giving me this job even though I had almost no experience with Android development.)

  2. Even though we were using RxJava in our project, which others say makes dealing with threading much easier, there was a time where I had to deal with what they call a race condition with this threads thing while working on version 2 of the app.

    It was hard. The bug was intermittent. It was hard to find, [partly because that part of the project uses RxJava in a wrong way(?) After I few weeks/months working on the project I discovered that when using RxJava, methods must return Observables all the way up from the data source to the presentation layer, to avoid memory leaks and so that they can be easily composed.

    But I'm not 100% sure if the wrong way of using RxJava is truly the reason for that bug. Perhaps it was just my ignorance on how to deal with threads. Luckily, that feature was removed during the development of version 3 of the app. Yehey!

    I still have to learn more about this threads thing.

June 2018 - June 2019 (1 year, 1 month)

Software Developer (.NET)

Worked on an application used for points-based rewards system for agents in a company.

Also involved in a team working on a Customer Relationship Management app for an online store. The CRM generates reports, allows searching for nearby clients, viewing quotes of clients, viewing products and number of stocks available, etc.

The first app I worked on has two ways for data access: one uses a database-first model of Entity Framework and the other one uses a code-first model of Entity Framework. It sometimes get's in the way when I'm searching for the model to use when adding features in the app. So I refactored the app so that it will only use the code-first model. Then, when the refactorings was finished, I was able to delete all of the the database-first models.

But it was just a small app and not very complex, so it was doable within a short period of time.

I was the only one working on my first project in the company so it seemed to me that I was free to do whatever I wanted with the codebase.

I noticed that there was a test module in the project, but it was empty. So I decided to find a way where that I can create tests for the tasks assigned to me. I needed to re-structure things

... from this:         ... to this:    

... to make the code testable.

I was able to setup the tests, and then managed to create some unit tests and some acceptance tests, but I later abandoned them for some reasons...

The major reason why the tests were abandoned was because I started working on the project with the kind of mindset which says something like "I have all the time in the world to work on this project, and so I will be able to write all the tests needed". Well, I later learned that the client does not always have all the time in the world to give to me. Worse, I needed to work somewhere else so I have to resign from the job.

Because of the restructuring that I did, the project now has two different structures: the original one, and the other one which makes the code easier to test. Poor guy who inherited the codebase.

... More than a year later, when I am already working in another company, I came across these words in "The Mythical Man-Month" by Frederick P. Brooks:

"... I will certainly not contend that only the architects will have good architectural ideas. Often the fresh concept does come from an implementer or from a user. However, all my own experience convinces me, and I have tried to show, that the conceptual integrity of a system determines its ease of use. Good features and ideas that do not integrate with a system's basic concepts are best left out. If there appear many such important but incompatible ideas, one scraps the whole system and starts again on an integrated system with different basic concepts."

I think the lesson to be learned in that is that if one decides to restructure a codebase, he must choose a structure that is not too different from the old one but still solves the problem he is having with the current structure.

I think that changing it to a completely different structure is okay only if the original restructur-er will be involved in the project for a long time.

(* the images in this section are from Mark Seeman's post, "Layers, Onions, Ports, Adapters: it's all the same")

July 2019 - Present

Software Developer (.NET)

July 2019 - April 2020:

Member of a team working on a social networking site used by employees and clients of a company whose services involves offering coworking spaces, meeting rooms and physical offices as well as virtual offices to people and businesses.

May 2020 - Oct 2020:

Our client was affected by the lockdowns, so our work with them stopped (temporarily, I hope), and our team was put on bench. I was learning Angular, Microservices in .NET, and Domain-Driven Design during this time.

Software Ninja Class

I’m an Initiate; perhaps a beginner Codesmith

Using Terence McGhee’s “Software Ninja Class Hierarchy”, today, I consider myself to be an Initiate, because I try to write code that is easy to read. I do that because I know that programmers spend more time reading code than writing code.

I’m not saying that I always write code that is easy to read. I still write messy code during trying times, or during boring times, or during lazy times — most especially when I’m working on a legacy code base where trying to write clean code is much harder to do than when writing code from scratch — but that comes with the intention of cleaning them up later of course :grin:. But I’m already aware, through experience, that code that is easy to read is valuable code. I also understand that later means never, so if your organization insists that I should never write messy code, I will be happy to comply. It might take more time, of course.

Also, I heard some people say that programmers sometimes sell themselves short. So you might still forgive me if I consider myself a Level “Zero” Codesmith because I have little knowledge about TDD, the SOLID principles, Clean Architecture, and some Design Patterns.

But Terence McGhee said that to be considered a codesmith one must already have the experience of “consistently applying these software-creation techniques successfully in real software.” So perhaps seeing my own self as a Codesmith is just wishful thinking…

Caution: I claimed to know OOP when I applied for my first and second jobs. I passed the interviews during those times, of course. But a few years later, I realized that I barely knew what OOP is really all about. I came to this realization while listening to a talk of Uncle Bob Martin where he mentioned something about programmers claiming to know OOP when they do not truly know OOP. Ouch! I was that programmer. :laughing:

This kind of realization actually gives me doubt on whether I already truly understand what OO is today. But… all I can say is that today, I know that I have a better understanding of what OO truly is.

… So be cautious about me claiming to be an Initiate already. Perhaps I am still a Chump Coder, or an Expanded Chump, in which case all I can say is, “Teach me master…”

My learning philosophy today on software development

When I started coding, my focus on learning was trying to master the specifics of a programming language.

Then a few years later, my focus moved into trying to master specific frameworks and libraries.

But then I heard Uncle Bob Martin saying that software development has not changed in the last 40 years. I also heard Mattias Petter Johansson’s advise for programmers:

“… learn the stuff that doesn’t change around a lot. Learn the fundamentals that we figured out in the 70s and that have been true since. Learn programming in general. Don’t be a better Angular programmer, or even a better JavaScript programmer — just be a better programmer, period.”

So today, my focus moved into learning the basic principles of software design, because these are the things that do not change a lot, and these things will help me make software that is highly maintainable, which many master programmers say is the primary value of software for customers (and for the programmers also).

Today, my learning philosophy is like this:

“Just-in-time learning” when learning about specific languages and frameworks and libraries

“Ahead-of-time learning” when learning about basic principles and practices in software development, and about programming in general

For example, there was a time when I was trying to learn AngularJS because it was the frontend framework being used in my new job (just-in-time learning of specific frameworks). Then on the side, I was consuming “Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code” of Martin Fowler (ahead-of-time learning of general concepts.)

There was also a time when I was training on .NET Microservices and .NET Core while working for Arcanys (just-in-time learning of specific frameworks). At the same time I was reading “Patterns, Principles, and Practices of Domain-Driven Design” (ahead-of-time learning of general concepts).

I hope that kind of learning philosophy is okay with you. :blush:


Apart from being a software developer, I enjoy reading books (sometimes) and listening to music, and playing basic piano.


go to Anti-résumé