Ace17

23 ms·

211.
"If" considered harmful(youtube.com)
3 points by Ace17 9y ago|0 comments
212.
by Ace17 9y ago
This is an dangerously simplistic analysis. The world doesn't divide into "innovators" on one side and "copycats" on the other side. It would certainly be convenient, but it's simply not the case, especially wh
213.
by Ace17 9y ago
> Software might mean the complete destruction of private property as a concept. Not "Software", but "SAAS".
214.
by Ace17 9y ago
I feel James Coplien's advice on the question is interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtHQGs3zFAM&t=500 TLDW: "refactoring your way out" from a simple but too short-sighted design might take a rid
215.
by Ace17 9y ago
> Now, if you want to suggest that tools can add enough value to overcome the negatives from having rubbish programmers, I'm all ears, because I've never seen a tool that can do that. The bad programmers just abuse the tools or
216.
by Ace17 9y ago
Let's dismiss ideas, not people.
217.
by Ace17 9y ago
"The drawback of dependency Inversion is that you need a dependency injection container, and you need to configure it." This is simply wrong. You can do dependency injection without a container (using factories, or link-time pol
218.
by Ace17 9y ago
Actually, refactoring browsers were pioneered by Smalltalk people.
219.
by Ace17 9y ago
"What killed Smalltalk? it was just too easy to make a mess" (Ward Cunningham) The power of your tools is an orthogonal issue. It isn't related to the discipline and cleanliness issue: for example, dynamic typing allows you t
220.
by Ace17 9y ago
> the DoD did fund the research and development of several programming languages and tools that would have offered precisely the hygiene Dijkstra would like to see in software development. No tool will force you to wash your hands. Hygie
221.
by Ace17 9y ago
This way of tracking worker concentration raises a lot of questions, especially in an era where we are surrounded with stuff designed to grab our concentration . What if access to social media is made impossible? What did the numbers look
222.
by Ace17 9y ago
> I see no more philosophical justification for physical property than for intellectual property. TL;DR: physical property="who gets to have this", 'intellectual property laws'="who gets to make money from this&
223.
by Ace17 9y ago
Tests are formal . Which means there's a lot less room for ambiguity, and that you can check an implementation for nearly zero-cost. I'm sure you can guess what the following function does by only looking at the following (incomp
224.
by Ace17 9y ago
This is closely related to the "paradox of tolerance" by Karl Popper: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance (whose TL;DR is "Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance.&
225.
by Ace17 9y ago
> It just means my "utility function" is different to yours. Most people include "social recognition" into their utility function. Spreading the idea that "eating too much beef is 'bad'" might actu
226.
by Ace17 9y ago
Why remove RAII? It's not fundamentally incompatible with "Better C" semantics, especially if there are no exceptions.
227.
by Ace17 9y ago
That's not so simple, because large adoption at a too early stage causes the language definition to freeze before it reaches maturity. Simon Peyton-Jones from the Haskell community explaining exactly that: "What happens if [a lang
228.
by Ace17 9y ago
Please let me correct what you just said: " rent seeking is pretty blatantly anti-competitive [1], detrimental to individuals [2][3], and rotting the system from the inside out [4][5]." Now let's talk about having control ov
229.
by Ace17 9y ago
“The act of describing a program in unambiguous detail and the act of programming are one and the same.” - Kevlin Henney While I mostly agree with this quote, please note that it doesn't mean our formal programming languages can't
230.
by Ace17 9y ago
Answering to the main point of the author: Architectural intent can be expressed in a formal way, but it requires a formal language that allows you to define new abstractions. And designing such a language is way harder than defining a smal
231.
by Ace17 9y ago
Yeah, but as dspig mentioned above, this only applies to v3 of VST, which is almost nobody uses. We're all using v2.3/v2.4.
232.
by Ace17 9y ago
IIRC the VST SDK terms forbid the redistribution of the SDK itself ; which is partly what makes it GPL-incompatible. Whether this restriction applies on translated versions is legally grey.
233.
by Ace17 9y ago
Independent creation?
234.
by Ace17 9y ago
The term "piracy" would describe a lot better "the act of developing/releasing malware/ransomware" - at least, it would involve the notion of "attacking". Maybe the time has come to slowly shift the m
235.
by Ace17 9y ago
The combinatorial explosion of state is only problematic if some parts of your program can actually "see" the global state resulting from the combinations, and thus, depend on some specific combinations in an undesirable way. In t
236.
by Ace17 9y ago
I suggest to look at Alan Kay's definition, since he's the one who invented the term "object oriented". http://www.purl.org/stefan_ram/pub/doc_kay_oop_en
237.
by Ace17 9y ago
The word "free" has shown to be very confusing, especially to people wanting to discuss funding or business model. Richard Stallman tried to attenuate the confusion with the following slogan: "Think 'free' as in &#x
238.
by Ace17 9y ago
> But at some point in the food chain, software developers need to put food on the table and send their kids to school. How does that happen if all software is free? Please note "free" has nothing to do with price, but with end
239.
by Ace17 9y ago
Rubik's cubes?
240.
by Ace17 9y ago
Ludum Dare? :-)

More ›