4 ms·
So you basically copy the computation of someone else. But that doesn’t solve the problem of the computation.
by steve1977 3y ago
So you basically copy the computation of someone else. But that doesn’t solve the problem of the computation.
- koliber 3y agoIt needs to be like this. There is an underlying computation. You can cache the results of this computation in a DB table. Sometimes, ad hoc things happen in our culture. Spurious bank holidays get added on a day’s notice in exceptional situations. These can be inserted into the cached DB. There is no calculation to back them.
- kolinko 3y agoBank Holidays, days of mourning, or a pandemic and war. The systems should be done so that the calendar can be agile like that.
- hermitdev 3y ago> days of mourning This is a big one. And you don't get much notice, maybe a day or two. Typical ones in the US are death of a President or prominent Senator (I _think_ we had one for John McCain). Much easier if you can insert the holiday in a lookup table and have all your systems adapt.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- cqqxo4zV46cp 3y agoSoftware people hate hearing when the solution to a problem is anything other than more, more complex, software.
- vundercind 3y agoI can’t prove it, but suspect a lot of business processes would be overall more efficient with less automation. Once you factor in the cost of automation, the cost of maintenance, the cost of un-fucking the computerized system when it manages to make a mistake “at scale”, et c.
- fipar 3y agoIt’s not always a computation problem. Unexpected bank holidays (happened to me in 2002 during a financial crisis), official days of mourning, etc. Nothing to compute there: a government declares a holiday and you just enter it into the table. Sure, you can compute Easter (you can just look up Knuth’s explanation of the algorithm for this…), but you can’t compute government decrees.
- I_ 3y agoNot yet ;)