8 ms·

Folks, why are you upvoting this? It only talks about CPU usage, Node not being Unixy enough, and Javascript being terrible. A better critique would have incl

Folks, why are you upvoting this? It only talks about CPU usage, Node not being Unixy enough, and Javascript being terrible. A better critique would have included talks about callback hell, or the general philosophical issues of non-block/evented work versus synchronous programming: see the classic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzkRVzciAZg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzkRVzciAZg . This isn't even that great a rant. (I appreciate my fellow Rails devs probably upvoting it out of spite, but c'mon...)

anonymoushn 13y ago
It's also two years old. I don't get it.
maratd 13y ago
> Folks, why are you upvoting this? Mostly, because it's funny. What's even funnier is how people take this sort of stuff personally. I use Node, I know its limitations. I also use PHP. And Ruby. And Python. I use everything. I like having a full toolbox. These languages are just that. Tools. If you went up to a carpenter and made fun of his hammer, do you really think he'll be pissed? He knows what his hammer is capable of and doesn't need anyone else to tell him. A better question would be why this sort of commentary starts flame wars?
- WoodenChair 13y ago
  This is not directed at your comment individually, nor is it anything about your content in particular... but IF I HAVE TO HEAR THE TOOL/TOOLSET ANALOGY ONE MORE TIME to describe programming languages, I think I will... be disappointed in your lack of creativity. Really, don't you guys have any other analogies in your "toolbox"?
  - GhotiFish 13y ago
    Yes! I have the car analogy in my toolbox as well!
  - jiggy2011 13y ago
    It's not even that great an analogy. If I use a particular hammer to build a table then I could throw it away at the end because it is no longer important as long as the nails are in the right place. I could even use a different hammer to drive every single nail if I wanted to and it wouldn't matter. Languages , libraries , frameworks and runtimes on the other hand literally become a part of the end product. In many (maybe most) programs the total LOC count for the project is dominated by third party code vs original work. So in this case they are not the tools, they are the nails.
    - Double_Cast 13y ago
      Some analogies are more robust than others. But all analogies snap when stretched too far. I think this is one of those cases where you unfairly stretched it too far. hammer : painting :: tool : finished_product Though cliche, it's not like the analogy is misleading. Nails might not be "tools" since they can't normally be used on the next project, like a hammer can. But nails are still a means to an end, e.g. "hang painting on wall". If we really wanted to, we could stretch the analogy ad infinitum. "What's the nail represent? What's the room represent? Who bought the painting? etc." But the purpose of an analogy isn't to draw parallels between the objects' irrelevant particulars. Its purpose is to abstract from the objects an equivalency of relationship (i.e. means/end). In this case, I think the equivalency is preserved even after we extended our analogy in ways it was never intended to be.
      - jiggy2011 13y ago
        It depends on the point that you are using the analogy to support. The tool analogy often gets trotted out to make an argument about something like language or framework choice not being important to the success of a project, but I think that the analogy becomes very brittle here for the reasons stated. Deciding to switch something like a hammer (or text editor) mid project is likely not a big deal but switching to another language or framework can be an ordeal that requires planning. Since software projects are almost never "done" until they are obsolete the choice of language can have significant implications down the road that you wouldn't have if it was simply a "tool".
  - d0m 13y ago
    It's not really an analogy though.. Languages, technologies and frameworks are just tools to build stuff. Said differently, to build stuff, you need tools. Programming languages are programmers' tools..
    - WoodenChair 13y ago
      It is though, because they're usually referring to woodworking tools or car fixing tools - not the generalized term "tools".
      - maratd 13y ago
        > because they're usually referring to woodworking tools Says the guy with the wooden name!
- jepsen 13y ago
  I use node, .net, java, php, python, ruby, different horses for different courses. Sounds like this guy just loves to argue, bet he's fun to work with....
JonnieCache 13y ago
I dunno... "I know there's a closed form solution. Shouldn't you be in front of a mirror somewhere, figuring out how to introduce yourself to her?" is pretty great.
- LaGrange 13y ago
  If you’re a teenager then yes. Otherwise, it’s an ad persona towards an expected legitimate complaint: „hey, maybe a lot of work actually isn’t CPU-bound?” Seriously, if you can’t discern between solution for CPU-bound and IO-bound problems, you should consider a different career.
  - JonnieCache 13y ago
    Calling me a teenager, and then accusing the article of ad hominem six words later. Superb.
  - GhotiFish 13y ago
    I think the author didn't spell out the issue with that useless bit of trivia because the issue is obvious. Whether the implementation of the function is inefficient or not is immaterial to the argument. Most things arn't CPU bound, some things are. So the complaint stands.
LaGrange 13y ago
It’s Ted Dziuba, a minor network celebrity and generally annoying dude with sensible technology competence and otherwise usual libertarian blabbing tendencies, including „get a life” style comments as evidenced in the post (if you tell people to get a life, you should get a life, and no, I don’t have a life). And this post actually got deleted, which is why you’re getting it from Google Cache. Consider that an art statement on the condition of Hacker News existence.

anonymoushn 13y ago

It's also two years old. I don't get it.

maratd 13y ago

> Folks, why are you upvoting this? Mostly, because it's funny. What's even funnier is how people take this sort of stuff personally. I use Node, I know its limitations. I also use PHP. And Ruby. And Python. I use everything. I like having a full toolbox. These languages are just that. Tools. If you went up to a carpenter and made fun of his hammer, do you really think he'll be pissed? He knows what his hammer is capable of and doesn't need anyone else to tell him. A better question would be why this sort of commentary starts flame wars?

WoodenChair 13y ago
This is not directed at your comment individually, nor is it anything about your content in particular... but IF I HAVE TO HEAR THE TOOL/TOOLSET ANALOGY ONE MORE TIME to describe programming languages, I think I will... be disappointed in your lack of creativity. Really, don't you guys have any other analogies in your "toolbox"?
- GhotiFish 13y ago
  Yes! I have the car analogy in my toolbox as well!
- jiggy2011 13y ago
  It's not even that great an analogy. If I use a particular hammer to build a table then I could throw it away at the end because it is no longer important as long as the nails are in the right place. I could even use a different hammer to drive every single nail if I wanted to and it wouldn't matter. Languages , libraries , frameworks and runtimes on the other hand literally become a part of the end product. In many (maybe most) programs the total LOC count for the project is dominated by third party code vs original work. So in this case they are not the tools, they are the nails.
  - Double_Cast 13y ago
    Some analogies are more robust than others. But all analogies snap when stretched too far. I think this is one of those cases where you unfairly stretched it too far. hammer : painting :: tool : finished_product Though cliche, it's not like the analogy is misleading. Nails might not be "tools" since they can't normally be used on the next project, like a hammer can. But nails are still a means to an end, e.g. "hang painting on wall". If we really wanted to, we could stretch the analogy ad infinitum. "What's the nail represent? What's the room represent? Who bought the painting? etc." But the purpose of an analogy isn't to draw parallels between the objects' irrelevant particulars. Its purpose is to abstract from the objects an equivalency of relationship (i.e. means/end). In this case, I think the equivalency is preserved even after we extended our analogy in ways it was never intended to be.
    - jiggy2011 13y ago
      It depends on the point that you are using the analogy to support. The tool analogy often gets trotted out to make an argument about something like language or framework choice not being important to the success of a project, but I think that the analogy becomes very brittle here for the reasons stated. Deciding to switch something like a hammer (or text editor) mid project is likely not a big deal but switching to another language or framework can be an ordeal that requires planning. Since software projects are almost never "done" until they are obsolete the choice of language can have significant implications down the road that you wouldn't have if it was simply a "tool".
- d0m 13y ago
  It's not really an analogy though.. Languages, technologies and frameworks are just tools to build stuff. Said differently, to build stuff, you need tools. Programming languages are programmers' tools..
  - WoodenChair 13y ago
    It is though, because they're usually referring to woodworking tools or car fixing tools - not the generalized term "tools".
    - maratd 13y ago
      > because they're usually referring to woodworking tools Says the guy with the wooden name!
jepsen 13y ago
I use node, .net, java, php, python, ruby, different horses for different courses. Sounds like this guy just loves to argue, bet he's fun to work with....

JonnieCache 13y ago

I dunno... "I know there's a closed form solution. Shouldn't you be in front of a mirror somewhere, figuring out how to introduce yourself to her?" is pretty great.

LaGrange 13y ago
If you’re a teenager then yes. Otherwise, it’s an ad persona towards an expected legitimate complaint: „hey, maybe a lot of work actually isn’t CPU-bound?” Seriously, if you can’t discern between solution for CPU-bound and IO-bound problems, you should consider a different career.
- JonnieCache 13y ago
  Calling me a teenager, and then accusing the article of ad hominem six words later. Superb.
- GhotiFish 13y ago
  I think the author didn't spell out the issue with that useless bit of trivia because the issue is obvious. Whether the implementation of the function is inefficient or not is immaterial to the argument. Most things arn't CPU bound, some things are. So the complaint stands.

LaGrange 13y ago

It’s Ted Dziuba, a minor network celebrity and generally annoying dude with sensible technology competence and otherwise usual libertarian blabbing tendencies, including „get a life” style comments as evidenced in the post (if you tell people to get a life, you should get a life, and no, I don’t have a life). And this post actually got deleted, which is why you’re getting it from Google Cache. Consider that an art statement on the condition of Hacker News existence.