3 ms·
The article is interesting food for thought, but there’s a fundamental error. In the toy algorithmic problems, having the wrong big O solution is wrong because
by shhehebehdh 8y ago
The article is interesting food for thought, but there’s a fundamental error. In the toy algorithmic problems, having the wrong big O solution is wrong because it doesn’t finish in a satisfactory amount of time. From this he seems to infer that anything that takes longer than another alternative is “wrong.” But the thing that made the toy solution wrong does not transfer to the other example problems! An editor dropping frames clearly isn’t sufficient to render it unusable for a significant slice of the target audience (proof by existence).
- alexashka 8y agoReplace 'wrong' with 'sucks' and you'll be much closer to getting what the author's saying.
- redka 8y agoStill doesn't make the metaphor make any sense. If anything, it is proving the exact opposite point since when it comes to programing languages/environments the difference in speed is much more comparable to the 10-30ms from the example (negligible) than to the "years" - the one being "wrong".
- shhehebehdh 8y agoIf he meant that word, he should have used that word. Even if he meant “sucks,” I don’t think he’s right. I use VS Code professionally. It’s far better than Sublime Text or notepad++, despite making different trade offs on the native vs electron UI front. To say something sucks is a wholistic statements that isn’t supported by the evidence he gives. It’s far more accurate to say “it’s unfortunate that electron has these drawbacks.” That’s true but also kind of vacuous.