> Sorry for the adversarial tone

From someone who called other people "toddler" ...

> - not wanting to waste an average of 2 ...

If you read my comment, you see that I called it a "knee-jerk reaction", it is not sometimes I will really defend. It is just when I see people like you, self-centered and unable to accept that someone can like interacting at the office without calling them "toddler" and inventing that these person will interrupt you for no good reason after you make clear you don't like it.

> Based on your views you are either ...

None of these descriptions correspond to me. This just confirm my feeling that you "think you know all" but don't really.

> and we are all snowflakes unreasonably complaining.

Let's be clear on that: I have nothing against you complaining. My problem is that you are complaining about what others are doing to you but you are also complaining that others don't accept you doing the same thing to them.

> They can't be good at coding if they don't understand the goal of the code

That's my point: people need to communicate A LOT, ask questions, interact. Bad developers are the ones who quickly create a picture in their head and then run with it. I see that a lot in my work (I'm a scientist in the R&D of my company, working with developers to create implementation of the models and algorithms my team design).

> Doing good work, for which you require peace and quiet and a focused state of mind, is what being good at coding is all about

And yet, I see developers focusing only on that and yet producing shit software.

> ... written form ... document well ...

But this is not what we are talking about. No one here is saying that this should not exist. But is not sufficient.

Let me demonstrate to you why. In software development, the whole process is based on the fact that bugs will happen. There are linter, code reviews, version controls that allow reverting, logs built in the code, advanced ticket system to deal with bug raising, ... Coding perfectly in one go is hard, impossible. Documentation and communicating things are obviously worse. Code are logical instruction with mathematical significance. Communication between person A and B can easily be misunderstood with both "being right", simply because human being cannot read minds and consider the thousand of possible mental pictures that the interlocutor has in mind. Because of that, documentation is bound to be more often incorrect than the code. It does not mean it should not be done, but it means that we should continue to continuously fine-tune our understanding, and it includes asking quick and easy questions.

Again, you are misconstruing the situation: no one here is arguing that writing things down is bad or should not be done. Simply, different mode of communication have different purpose and different pros and cons. Asking questions is sometimes the correct and smart thing to do.

> The premise that everyone is more efficient with constant interruption and questions pouring from every direction, all the time, is laughable at best.

WHO IS SAYING THAT. Can you show ONE, ONE person here who is defending that?

GP was simply saying that they like solving quick problem with a quick question, it avoids a lot of problem down the line or a lot of useless inefficient process.

Your reaction was to invent that GP would bother you all the time for information that exists somewhere else. You just have to realize that the world is more diverse than your own little person: some team works with little questions and it works very very well. The fact that you have to call GP toddler because their way of working is not the same as yours is why I think you are the toddler here. In fact, it is not even that their way of working is not the same as yours: you even seem to be asking people to do things that you will refuse to do yourself.