5 ms·

This is a good list, but it would be so much better with some (brief) pointers to counter-examples to the beliefs.

unscaled 10y ago
This unfortunately follows the conventions of the genre called "Falsehood programmers believe about X": http://spaceninja.com/2015/12/08/falsehoods-programmers-believe/ http://spaceninja.com/2015/12/08/falsehoods-programmers-beli... I honestly think this genre is horrible and counterproductive, even though the writer's intentions are good. It gives no examples, no explanations, no guidelines for proper implementations - just a list of condescending gotchas, showing off the superior intellect and perception of the author.
- kdeldycke 10y ago
  Managed to compile a list of these at: https://github.com/kdeldycke/awesome-falsehood#awesome-falsehood- https://github.com/kdeldycke/awesome-falsehood#awesome-false...
  - kazagistar 10y ago
    Is this a real response to the parent post? As in, is your list curated to provide actual examples and meaningful tips, or is it just an even bigger pile of useless condescension?
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - Camillo 10y ago
      Presumably the post being replied to was at the top of the page at the time of the reply.
      - pwdisswordfish 10y ago
        So what if it was? The reply still doesn't address the point raised by kazagistar. I looked at kdeldycke's list and some examples in fact do address it, but there's nothing in his comment to indicate it. It's not an unreasonable question to make.
- inopinatus 10y ago
  Perhaps there is scope for a list of Falsehoods Programmers Believe About Falsehoods Programmers Believe.
  - mojuba 10y ago
    Let's start then: 1. Everything said in every "Falsehoods Programmers Believe..." list is true. The Falsehoods sound like ultimate truths only because of the literary genre. They sound like they were written by an expert who not only knows what's true, but also knows what we think we know, which kind of automatically takes him/her to the next level of expertise.
    - kirillkh 10y ago
      2. There exists a "Falsehoods Programmers Believe" list that is entirely true.
    - unscaled 10y ago
      3. Every falsehood that is true should be accounted for. 4. Every falsehood that is true CAN be accounted for. 5. Making your code compatible with a falsehood doesn't come with a price. 6. There are no falsehoods which are mutually exclusive.
      - pwdisswordfish 10y ago
        > Every falsehood that is true Hmm.
  - kdeldycke 10y ago
    Love that idea! Please help me compile a list there: https://github.com/kdeldycke/kevin-deldycke-blog/blob/master/content/posts/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-falsehoods-lists.md https://github.com/kdeldycke/kevin-deldycke-blog/blob/master... :)
- icebraining 10y ago
  It's true that examples and explanations would be nice and make for a more helpful guide, but those can usually be found with a bit of legwork, whereas the gotchas themselves are often only discovered by trial and error. In essence, don't look a gift horse in the mouth. A better approach would be to pick the list up and turn them into a collaborative work. Wiki, maybe?
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
  Aren't the falsehoods inherently guidelines? They give you an idea of which assumptions aren't safe to make.
- simias 10y ago
  I agree, I think this format works when the subject matter is trivial enough that it's easy to construct counter examples yourself once the contradiction is pointed out. The "Name" version is a good example of that, I can easily see how most of the examples on this list can be falsehoods. On the other hand in TFA some of the affirmations leave me more perplexed. For instance, regarding color conversion: "converting from A to B is just the inverse of converting from B to A". I wonder what's meant here. Is it just a matter of rounding or is there more to it than that? The catch 22 here is that if you understand this list then chances are you already knew about most of these gotchas. So yeah, a pretty bad format. Now we just have to write "`Falsehood programmers believe about X` considered harmful".
  - dom0 10y ago
    > I wonder what's meant here. Is it just a matter of rounding or is there more to it than that? Many colour spaces are non-overlapping, ie. one colour space has colours a different colour space simply doesn't have, so converting between them is often lossy and thus non-invertible.
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > Many colour spaces are non-overlapping, ie. one colour space has colours a different colour space simply doesn't have Wouldn't that be overlapping but non-coextensive? Non-overlapping would be no colors in common between color spaces, which would be odd.
      - dom0 10y ago
        Yes. I didn't realize that difference between my intermediate language and the output language of these comments :)
tedunangst 10y ago
Just reimagine it as "implicit assumptions to check for". From my limited experience in the field, a lot of these are things I know (or knew) but could easily forget in the midst of trying to get code to work.
imsofuture 10y ago
I hate the smug attitude of things like this. I get they're trying to raise awareness of a thing, but maybe take a moment to educate, instead of just smugly dunking on people about how much more you know about a thing that they don't.

This unfortunately follows the conventions of the genre called "Falsehood programmers believe about X": http://spaceninja.com/2015/12/08/falsehoods-programmers-believe/ http://spaceninja.com/2015/12/08/falsehoods-programmers-beli... I honestly think this genre is horrible and counterproductive, even though the writer's intentions are good. It gives no examples, no explanations, no guidelines for proper implementations - just a list of condescending gotchas, showing off the superior intellect and perception of the author.

kdeldycke 10y ago
Managed to compile a list of these at: https://github.com/kdeldycke/awesome-falsehood#awesome-falsehood- https://github.com/kdeldycke/awesome-falsehood#awesome-false...
- kazagistar 10y ago
  Is this a real response to the parent post? As in, is your list curated to provide actual examples and meaningful tips, or is it just an even bigger pile of useless condescension?
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - Camillo 10y ago
    Presumably the post being replied to was at the top of the page at the time of the reply.
    - pwdisswordfish 10y ago
      So what if it was? The reply still doesn't address the point raised by kazagistar. I looked at kdeldycke's list and some examples in fact do address it, but there's nothing in his comment to indicate it. It's not an unreasonable question to make.
inopinatus 10y ago
Perhaps there is scope for a list of Falsehoods Programmers Believe About Falsehoods Programmers Believe.
- mojuba 10y ago
  Let's start then: 1. Everything said in every "Falsehoods Programmers Believe..." list is true. The Falsehoods sound like ultimate truths only because of the literary genre. They sound like they were written by an expert who not only knows what's true, but also knows what we think we know, which kind of automatically takes him/her to the next level of expertise.
  - kirillkh 10y ago
    2. There exists a "Falsehoods Programmers Believe" list that is entirely true.
  - unscaled 10y ago
    3. Every falsehood that is true should be accounted for. 4. Every falsehood that is true CAN be accounted for. 5. Making your code compatible with a falsehood doesn't come with a price. 6. There are no falsehoods which are mutually exclusive.
    - pwdisswordfish 10y ago
      > Every falsehood that is true Hmm.
- kdeldycke 10y ago
  Love that idea! Please help me compile a list there: https://github.com/kdeldycke/kevin-deldycke-blog/blob/master/content/posts/falsehoods-programmers-believe-about-falsehoods-lists.md https://github.com/kdeldycke/kevin-deldycke-blog/blob/master... :)
icebraining 10y ago
It's true that examples and explanations would be nice and make for a more helpful guide, but those can usually be found with a bit of legwork, whereas the gotchas themselves are often only discovered by trial and error. In essence, don't look a gift horse in the mouth. A better approach would be to pick the list up and turn them into a collaborative work. Wiki, maybe?
TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
Aren't the falsehoods inherently guidelines? They give you an idea of which assumptions aren't safe to make.
simias 10y ago
I agree, I think this format works when the subject matter is trivial enough that it's easy to construct counter examples yourself once the contradiction is pointed out. The "Name" version is a good example of that, I can easily see how most of the examples on this list can be falsehoods. On the other hand in TFA some of the affirmations leave me more perplexed. For instance, regarding color conversion: "converting from A to B is just the inverse of converting from B to A". I wonder what's meant here. Is it just a matter of rounding or is there more to it than that? The catch 22 here is that if you understand this list then chances are you already knew about most of these gotchas. So yeah, a pretty bad format. Now we just have to write "`Falsehood programmers believe about X` considered harmful".
- dom0 10y ago
  > I wonder what's meant here. Is it just a matter of rounding or is there more to it than that? Many colour spaces are non-overlapping, ie. one colour space has colours a different colour space simply doesn't have, so converting between them is often lossy and thus non-invertible.
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    > Many colour spaces are non-overlapping, ie. one colour space has colours a different colour space simply doesn't have Wouldn't that be overlapping but non-coextensive? Non-overlapping would be no colors in common between color spaces, which would be odd.
    - dom0 10y ago
      Yes. I didn't realize that difference between my intermediate language and the output language of these comments :)

tedunangst 10y ago

Just reimagine it as "implicit assumptions to check for". From my limited experience in the field, a lot of these are things I know (or knew) but could easily forget in the midst of trying to get code to work.

imsofuture 10y ago

I hate the smug attitude of things like this. I get they're trying to raise awareness of a thing, but maybe take a moment to educate, instead of just smugly dunking on people about how much more you know about a thing that they don't.