3 ms·
> they always seem to end up taking 10 to 30 seconds to compile each time Oh yeah, that's huge, at least the time to sip half a glass, that's scandalous. Hmm..
by wott 10y ago
> they always seem to end up taking 10 to 30 seconds to compile each time
Oh yeah, that's huge, at least the time to sip half a glass, that's scandalous. Hmm... you're kidding, right? How can it be a problem in absolute value, and furthermore how can it be a problem in relative value? That time should be absolutely negligible vs the design, the thinking, the typing, the thinking again, etc.
> and this slows down debugging significantly.
There is also the option to think about what you program instead of proceeding by trial and error.
I don't want "a project of a certain size" to be handled through trial and error. And yet, according to the pitiful results and condition of current software, especially shitty web apps, that has to be representative of the current model of development.
- jstimpfle 10y agoI doubt you have done this kind of development. The advantages of fast edit/compile/run cycles are widely acknowledged (as are the advantages of compiled languages). Many development domains profit greatly from instant feedback. "Should I put more space here? Is the border too thick? Let's see". "Oops! I know why it's failing. I'm quickly going to fix the order of the arguments". It's great if you can do these things in 3-10 seconds instead of minutes. Not everybody is designing airplane control software.
- iLemming 10y agoInstant feedback? You ever heard about Figwheel? Watch the video and now imagine that it also works with mobile platforms.