2 ms·

Selection bias implies that people just like what they're familiar with; I'm sure that does keep people from switching to new tools, but that's not what I'm ref

Selection bias implies that people just like what they're familiar with; I'm sure that does keep people from switching to new tools, but that's not what I'm referring to. I'm talking about people who actually try new tools and reject them as useful to their problem domains; I try a lot of new tools, and some fit with the problems I solve better than others. I didn't quite remember what "data oriented meant," but a quick search brought up this article [1] on using data-driven design in games. It brings up some important points, but really the point of data flow design seems to be optimization and efficiency rather than making it easier to write the code. And I'm all for that, and I thank you for making me look that up since I will likely use that idea, but I'll keep my text editor for most of the game development I do going forward. Except maybe the particle systems, which as the article below points out, are typically already data oriented, and have had good data-flow-based tools for years. ;) [1] http://gamesfromwithin.com/data-oriented-design http://gamesfromwithin.com/data-oriented-design

agentultra 12y ago
I think you're referring to confirmation bias which is related but not quite the same. Never the less I understand what you're getting at. I took it to mean that the kinds of problems a programmer encounters is not sufficiently random to properly determine the usefulness of a given language or "paradigm." Which may keep people from switching to new, better tools (or from trying them out at all). The data-oriented design thing is interesting and something I've heard come and go over the years. Check out: http://www.dataorienteddesign.com/dodmain/ http://www.dataorienteddesign.com/dodmain/ and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHqFrNyLlpA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHqFrNyLlpA A video demonstration of Jai; a new compiler from Jonathan Blow designed around this paradigm. Cheers!
- SomeCallMeTim 12y ago
  Ahh, I see. Yeah, I guess I meant that each paradigm is inherently a different value for different domains, and so therefore has a different value for programmers who specialize in their domain(s). And when someone checks out a paradigm that doesn't match their domain, they may end up complaining about how the tool isn't good. Love the links. Listening to Blow talk now. Will look at the longer book later.

agentultra 12y ago

I think you're referring to confirmation bias which is related but not quite the same. Never the less I understand what you're getting at. I took it to mean that the kinds of problems a programmer encounters is not sufficiently random to properly determine the usefulness of a given language or "paradigm." Which may keep people from switching to new, better tools (or from trying them out at all). The data-oriented design thing is interesting and something I've heard come and go over the years. Check out: http://www.dataorienteddesign.com/dodmain/ http://www.dataorienteddesign.com/dodmain/ and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHqFrNyLlpA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHqFrNyLlpA A video demonstration of Jai; a new compiler from Jonathan Blow designed around this paradigm. Cheers!

SomeCallMeTim 12y ago
Ahh, I see. Yeah, I guess I meant that each paradigm is inherently a different value for different domains, and so therefore has a different value for programmers who specialize in their domain(s). And when someone checks out a paradigm that doesn't match their domain, they may end up complaining about how the tool isn't good. Love the links. Listening to Blow talk now. Will look at the longer book later.