4 ms·
Do you really think you can't solve both problems, or that fixing links hurts your ability to solve bigger problems? It's $500 to a contractor. You can even h
by codex 13y ago
Do you really think you can't solve both problems, or that fixing links hurts your ability to solve bigger problems? It's $500 to a contractor. You can even have someone else find the contractor. This smells fishy.
I suspect the fix will result in a large change to the code base and you want to always own/understand the code for some reason. So if you can't fix it yourself, nobody is allowed to, either. That's fine--just admit it's your baby and you don't want to let it go.
- wlievens 13y agoI guess it's also because of the technical elegance of using closurees for page actions. It's hard to admit that a technique that feels elegant and expressive fundamentally doesn't scale.
- CamperBob2 13y agoThat's part of being a mature developer. We've all stood stubbornly by a piece of inappropriate code that we want to use because it's so clean and elegant, but most of us have gotten past that stage of ego development by the second or third year of school or professional life. It goes without saying that Paul Graham has long since transcended that level. So, the only answer that fits all of the parameters is that he's trolling us.
- wlievens 13y agoOr that it's not his priority - that's the stated reason.
- CamperBob2 13y agoNot buying it. Priority or not, who leaves a forehead-slapper like that in their code for several years?
- read 13y agoYou're not far off to assume it hijacks your thinking process and steers it to the unimportant. The change to the code base would be easy. You can increase the expiration timeout or keep around more closures. It would come at the expense of using more computer hardware, which is an elegant technique of scaling: you free your human hardware to work on more important things.