5 ms·

There is reinventing the wheel and reinventing the wheel. It's cute when a person, learning as she goes, comes up with something that's been already invented.

by dexen 16y ago

There is reinventing the wheel and reinventing the wheel. It's cute when a person, learning as she goes, comes up with something that's been already invented. Only goes to show she understands the field. [1] It's unbelievably irritating when something that was widely implemented 10 or 20 or 30 years ago (and then even improved significantly) is now asserted as the next big thing. C'mon, be serious -_-' [2] [1] a nice guy thinks of swap (in userspace) just to hold strings of arbitrary length, calls it ``backed by file storage'': http://9fans.net/archive/2011/02/94 http://9fans.net/archive/2011/02/94 [2] no example I can think of ATM; but perhaps the above one could fit?

amalcon 16y ago
For [2], I'd normally suggest the thin client... except that it's got enough momentum that it may actually be the next big thing.
- dexen 16y ago
  Heh, perhaps Sun's demise helped thin client in a way? ;-)
bartonfink 16y ago
Garbage collection back in the 90's. Java really ran with that one.
- dexen 16y ago
  "We were not out to win over the Lisp programmers; we were after the C++ programmers. We managed to drag a lot of them about halfway to Lisp." - Guy Steele, Java spec co-author http://www.paulgraham.com/quotes.html http://www.paulgraham.com/quotes.html
Jach 16y ago
There are lots of examples for [2], but we should avoid listing them as they'll lead to arguments. In fact, we should also avoid listings for [1] since that can lead to anger venting.
zasz 16y ago
For [2]--NoSQL.
- dexen 16y ago
  Well yes and no. On one hand, NoSQL as ``let's ditch relational'' is [2] squared; especially as ditching relational because of SQL is ditching the only thing good about SQL. On the other hand, if NoSQL would mean ``let's have relational language better than SQL'', they hey, that's good! It's been tried [a] even before the SQL and tried [b] since then. It's not easy for something new to get traction with all the SQL code out there. But we will arrive there some day. -- [a] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISBL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISBL [b] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_manifesto http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_manifesto NB., if you attack a hot & popular topic, you better provide some argumentation, or you will be downvoted to the ground :-(
hardy263 16y ago
[2]http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/17/2/152.abstract http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/17/2/152.abstract Well, not really 10 or 20 or 30 years ago. More like 400 years ago.

by dexen 16y ago

amalcon 16y ago

For [2], I'd normally suggest the thin client... except that it's got enough momentum that it may actually be the next big thing.

dexen 16y ago
Heh, perhaps Sun's demise helped thin client in a way? ;-)

bartonfink 16y ago

Garbage collection back in the 90's. Java really ran with that one.

dexen 16y ago
"We were not out to win over the Lisp programmers; we were after the C++ programmers. We managed to drag a lot of them about halfway to Lisp." - Guy Steele, Java spec co-author http://www.paulgraham.com/quotes.html http://www.paulgraham.com/quotes.html

Jach 16y ago

There are lots of examples for [2], but we should avoid listing them as they'll lead to arguments. In fact, we should also avoid listings for [1] since that can lead to anger venting.

zasz 16y ago

For [2]--NoSQL.

dexen 16y ago
Well yes and no. On one hand, NoSQL as ``let's ditch relational'' is [2] squared; especially as ditching relational because of SQL is ditching the only thing good about SQL. On the other hand, if NoSQL would mean ``let's have relational language better than SQL'', they hey, that's good! It's been tried [a] even before the SQL and tried [b] since then. It's not easy for something new to get traction with all the SQL code out there. But we will arrive there some day. -- [a] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISBL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISBL [b] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_manifesto http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_manifesto NB., if you attack a hot & popular topic, you better provide some argumentation, or you will be downvoted to the ground :-(

hardy263 16y ago

[2]http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/17/2/152.abstract http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/17/2/152.abstract Well, not really 10 or 20 or 30 years ago. More like 400 years ago.