4 ms·
By simple statistics, most people are, on average, about average. This is true for any population large enough. I don't buy your assertion that C++ developers a
by tehmillhouse 8y ago
By simple statistics, most people are, on average, about average. This is true for any population large enough.
I don't buy your assertion that C++ developers are better than Java developers, and all else being equal, bad Java code doesn't blow up in as destructive a way as bad C++ code.
Deliberately keeping a working environment hazardous and unsafe doesn't give you a breed of superhumans that never let accidents happen, it just leads to a lot of unnecessary accidents.
- mem0r1 8y agoI think the main problem with a lot of high level language software developers (Java, ...) is that they often fail to consider the consequences of the fact that their software runs on real world hardware -> Memory access, Cache, Network Latency, Bandwith (Memory and Network), etc. Instead its all about artificial constructs as Design Patterns, OOP, etc. which often results in bloated, slow and therefore unusable software.
- ncphillips 8y ago> By simple statistics, most people are, on average, about average. I'm pretty sure this isn't true. Averages can be skewed by outliers. It's likely that most people are better/worse than average. Consider how the average life expectancy was horribly skewed by infant mortality.
- tome 8y agoYou're right, it isn't true. It doesn't even require outliers, just the curse of dimensionality. See for example https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2016/01/16/when-us-air-force-discovered-the-flaw-of-averages.html https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2016/01/16/when-us-air-...