3 ms·
You'd be better off with some stupid code that junior devs (or Grug brained senior devs) could easily understand for the 0.1% cases.
by fifilura 1y ago
You'd be better off with some stupid code that junior devs (or Grug brained senior devs) could easily understand for the 0.1% cases.
- smcin 1y ago(In that specific case, with that specific very skewed data distribution, yes. But not necessarily in the general case. So "they" would be better off with that solution, but not a generalized "you").
- username135 1y agoThen how do they learn
- chii 1y agoThey can learn finite automata from computer science text books.
- username135 1y agoTrue, i suppose, but theres simply no substitute for contextual, on the job learning. imo
- mannykannot 1y agoMy guess is that they would be more likely to “fix” and “improve” Ken’s algorithm than understand it (Jon Bentley mentioned, in passing, a similar case where this was the outcome.)
- fifilura 1y agoOh! "Educating the newbies/grunts" is the reason for #$#@&#? I'd say that an org has a limited number of pennies to spend on non-trivial code. Let's spend them wisely.
- account42 1y agoThat's exactly how you get today's abysmally slow software though, because if you chain enough components you end up running into 1% cases all the time.