3 ms·
'You have a point, but your point is conceptually "state is bad, build things with the least state possible". Even though I agree with this, there is a fundame
by nichochar 11y ago
'You have a point, but your point is conceptually "state is bad, build things with the least state possible".
Even though I agree with this, there is a fundamental difference between computer science and software engineering, and in actual software engineering there will often be hacks, and bad state. Even if sometimes it's not yours, but a library you're using.
I agree with you, but this article deals with a more "real life, pragmatic" approach, versus your thesis which is true, but a little more idealistic
- michaelt 11y agoReally? My definition would have been the opposite. When you call yourself an engineer you're saying you're like structural engineer building a bridge or an aeronautical engineer building a plane. You're saying you have a professional and moral obligation to do a good job. Any company that expects its developers to take pride in their work should track crashes and strive to produce software that doesn't routinely need to be restarted.
- zaphar 11y agoYou have to be careful there though. When it comes to computer software even perfect code can require a restart if different code on the same machine is interfering with it. The story has gotten much better but even now occasionally I'll have a reboot a Game or 3D visualization app because the graphics driver got wedged. It's not the applications fault it's the drivers fault. The reason power cycling is such a useful tool is that most computer systems are running in an environment where the things outside of it's control way outnumber the things within it's control.