4 ms·

> cron, Makefile, bash, sed For a programmer with a minimal amount of linux experience, it likely takes a week to catch up to what the codebase is doing with t

> cron, Makefile, bash, sed For a programmer with a minimal amount of linux experience, it likely takes a week to catch up to what the codebase is doing with these. > regex There are good tools to destructure regex. > python sql jq query I consider those as "given" or "learnable good enough in a week" > nginx conf Don't know this. Overall, "knowing all these languages" seems overblown in the choice of words for me. Java, Python, Prolog and Clojure? Hell yeah that would take quite a developer to replace! But the above? There is 1 proper general-purpose language in there, the rest are well-known tools with great examples online.

scarface74 8y ago
There is a difference between “knowing a language” and knowing the frameworks, idioms, ecosystems etc. I could learn Swift in a week but that doesn’t mean I would be a competent iOS developer. Someone who knew Python couldn’t do anything useful with the type of automation that I do with Boto3 without knowing the intricacies of AWS.
usgroup 8y ago
2 general purpose languages: R and Python. Multi language solutions make sense with languages that specialise. So I'd never write in "Go and Java" for example, or "Clojure and C#" or some other pair of general purpose languages. For me, Python usually ends up being the glue. But otherwise, I use a tonne of special purpose stuff. E.g: AMPL Prolog R Lua SQL sed/awk/grep/jq/etc C++ Makefile DSL cron DSL Docker DSL etc.
marcosdumay 8y ago
> There is 1 proper general-purpose language in there That will depend on what the GP has done with SQL. Also, JQuery implies in Javascript. There are up to 3 general-purpose languages in there, one of which nearly any developer will know. There should be plenty of people capable of taking the codebase, but it's not a trivial single language case. The upside is that good developers will be overrepresented when compared to the population that knows one of Python or Javascript.
- usgroup 8y ago
  JQ is a JSON specific query language . Not related to JavaScript.
- schwurb 8y ago
  > That will depend on what the GP has done with SQL. I am sure they built their UI with SQL - as opposed for example simply doing some queries, or some joined procedures at best. > Also, JQuery implies in Javascript. With uttermost likelyhood, they did not only dynamic changes of some html-documents there, but also their backend and crypthography. Enough with the snark... ("Language" is such a fuzzy term anyways. You could go as far as to label any interaction with a computer as one - there will always be a protocol according to which the interaction happens.) > There should be plenty of people capable of taking the codebase, but it's not a trivial single language case. The upside is that good developers will be overrepresented when compared to the population that knows one of Python or Javascript. I still stand by my point. As far as the cost of polyglotism is concerned, that is a one-general-purpose-language-codebase and the rest being DSLs (apparently R too). There are other codebases where there are really 2+ languages. I.e. some functional lang on top, some performance critical code hand-written in C, some logical programming language to do some constraint programming. Each of those 3 takes quite a lot experience.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - schwurb 8y ago
    Also sorry if I came of as rude, did not mean to!
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    You can actually build your UI with SQL, e.g PL/SQL.
    - schwurb 8y ago
      I had a gut feeling you could ;) Interesting.
gdy 8y ago
Now if you multiply these hypothetical two or three weeks by the hourly rate of someone who can learn, you'll get the cost of replacing the author with another employee. My point is that the cost could've been much smaller.
- schwurb 8y ago
  In my eyes, you neglect the opportunity cost of "using one tool for everything": You end up with a solution that is much harder to mantain, since the wheel will have been re-inventend many times over and sprinkled with bugs along the way. Given a problem of fixed complexity, at some point costs will rise when fewer tools are used. In summary: There is a "too much" and a "too few" when it comes to the number of tools used in a project. Where in that spectrum the OP is falling, we can't possibly know without knowing more details. Maybe the cost could have been smaller, maybe they hit an optimum and costs couldn't have been reduced by fewer tools (or more tools).
  - gdy 8y ago
    True. Still, bash and (most likely) sed could've been easily replaced with Python.

scarface74 8y ago

There is a difference between “knowing a language” and knowing the frameworks, idioms, ecosystems etc. I could learn Swift in a week but that doesn’t mean I would be a competent iOS developer. Someone who knew Python couldn’t do anything useful with the type of automation that I do with Boto3 without knowing the intricacies of AWS.

usgroup 8y ago

2 general purpose languages: R and Python. Multi language solutions make sense with languages that specialise. So I'd never write in "Go and Java" for example, or "Clojure and C#" or some other pair of general purpose languages. For me, Python usually ends up being the glue. But otherwise, I use a tonne of special purpose stuff. E.g: AMPL Prolog R Lua SQL sed/awk/grep/jq/etc C++ Makefile DSL cron DSL Docker DSL etc.

marcosdumay 8y ago

> There is 1 proper general-purpose language in there That will depend on what the GP has done with SQL. Also, JQuery implies in Javascript. There are up to 3 general-purpose languages in there, one of which nearly any developer will know. There should be plenty of people capable of taking the codebase, but it's not a trivial single language case. The upside is that good developers will be overrepresented when compared to the population that knows one of Python or Javascript.

usgroup 8y ago
JQ is a JSON specific query language . Not related to JavaScript.
schwurb 8y ago
> That will depend on what the GP has done with SQL. I am sure they built their UI with SQL - as opposed for example simply doing some queries, or some joined procedures at best. > Also, JQuery implies in Javascript. With uttermost likelyhood, they did not only dynamic changes of some html-documents there, but also their backend and crypthography. Enough with the snark... ("Language" is such a fuzzy term anyways. You could go as far as to label any interaction with a computer as one - there will always be a protocol according to which the interaction happens.) > There should be plenty of people capable of taking the codebase, but it's not a trivial single language case. The upside is that good developers will be overrepresented when compared to the population that knows one of Python or Javascript. I still stand by my point. As far as the cost of polyglotism is concerned, that is a one-general-purpose-language-codebase and the rest being DSLs (apparently R too). There are other codebases where there are really 2+ languages. I.e. some functional lang on top, some performance critical code hand-written in C, some logical programming language to do some constraint programming. Each of those 3 takes quite a lot experience.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- schwurb 8y ago
  Also sorry if I came of as rude, did not mean to!
- pjmlp 8y ago
  You can actually build your UI with SQL, e.g PL/SQL.
  - schwurb 8y ago
    I had a gut feeling you could ;) Interesting.

gdy 8y ago

Now if you multiply these hypothetical two or three weeks by the hourly rate of someone who can learn, you'll get the cost of replacing the author with another employee. My point is that the cost could've been much smaller.

schwurb 8y ago
In my eyes, you neglect the opportunity cost of "using one tool for everything": You end up with a solution that is much harder to mantain, since the wheel will have been re-inventend many times over and sprinkled with bugs along the way. Given a problem of fixed complexity, at some point costs will rise when fewer tools are used. In summary: There is a "too much" and a "too few" when it comes to the number of tools used in a project. Where in that spectrum the OP is falling, we can't possibly know without knowing more details. Maybe the cost could have been smaller, maybe they hit an optimum and costs couldn't have been reduced by fewer tools (or more tools).
- gdy 8y ago
  True. Still, bash and (most likely) sed could've been easily replaced with Python.