Roboprog

61 ms·

601.
by Roboprog 10y ago
I have been using Ramdajs, rather than lodash, but they both do about the same thing. One difference is that Ramda puts the functions before the data in its library calls, so that you can curry/apply the app logic function (e.g. - per
602.
by Roboprog 10y ago
On the one hand, I really miss simply being able to use "Make" for builds (Damn you to HELL, Microsoft!). On the other hand, I loathe the spam code that checked exceptions causes (alas MS/Anders/C# gets this right, and J
603.
by Roboprog 10y ago
I have gotten to hate most Android apps, constantly sending notifications - spam on the screen, phone on the desk going "ding, ding, ding" all afternoon :-(
604.
by Roboprog 10y ago
I have found a nice compromise, in Angular apps at least, is to make a directive (tag library) that generates my "<style>" block. It's reasonably "thin", but I can use variables to hold repeated style elements
605.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Hmm. The "fear" aspect sounds a lot like what Steve Yegge called software conservatism.
606.
by Roboprog 10y ago
There's a certain amount of irony in mentioning "Worse is Better" in this context. People trying to use Javascript as a surrogate C++^H^H^H Java will be sorely disappointed. People trying to use Javascript as something that b
607.
by Roboprog 10y ago
I remember the, well, "rage" I had at Sun when I stumbled across RoR. I had completed my Java web certification the year before. The Java stuff seemed clumsy and repetitive. One year later, saw Rails. "Why couldn't y
608.
by Roboprog 10y ago
I think the other poster meant 3rd party libraries, rather than the runtime. That said, the docs on (most of) the libraries I have used are generally pretty good. * Prototype - excellent docs (but library since overshadowed by jQuery) * jQu
609.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Angular 1.0, June 2012 https://github.com/angular/angular.js/releases?after=v1.0.4 ... And I actually prefer ng-1 to the transpiling mess that is ng-2, as well as preferring to use functional composition rather th
610.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Maybe it's a heat sink, too.
611.
by Roboprog 10y ago
I suppose it gives them time to get it right, rather than rushing to wrap it up, but also tries to pull the old "vaporware" trick of trying to get potential customers to delay purchasing a competitor's product.
612.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Once in a while, I get to help my college age daughter learn "R" programming. That's a pretty interesting language, which she probably knows better than I do now. (at least operational knowledge of the library, but not all
613.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Irony: I work with a group of about a half dozen devs for ... UC Davis (same uni as the prof mentioned in the article). We are all 50-ish, and work with minimal hand holding. We do grant work for the state, and to some extent, the feder
614.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Sure, but not if I'm just gronkulating a bunch of stuff to spit out a short summary "on the screen" (or equivalent).
615.
by Roboprog 10y ago
It can be difficult to get "hard data" about a topic, as most of us certainly don't have that available in our day to day work. The best you can hope for is to find somebody else's academic research, and then riff on it
616.
by Roboprog 10y ago
A point not to be underestimated. It's a good place to take up ad-hoc stuff, or try something that you yourself are pretty new at. Not that I am ever likely to speak at a conference.
617.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Maybe we disagree about scale :-) Vim is my "little" editor; JetBrains (and the like) are my "big" editor (albeit with vi[m] plugin to avoid the mental context switch). Somewhere an emacs user is laughing at me, but I&#x
618.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Hah. I remember using those on MS-DOS PCs back in the late 80s, as well. We put work-session data into the RAM disk, then saved it back to the hard drive at opportune times.
619.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Some are, some aren't :-) Some are just lost if autocomplete in the IDE doesn't enter stuff for them, and the more verbosely the IDE spews, the better, cuz it looks like "work".
620.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Thank you thank you thank you (all) for pointing out the obvious resume padding. Suck relevant DB entries into memory. There is no step 2.
621.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Along that lines, it's also funny when somebody does an "armchair quarterback" of an older codebase. A company I used to work for was closing its local office, and moving the work we did closer to the home office. One of the
622.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Yeah, I enjoyed the "Invented Here Syndrome" article that was posted here a few days ago, for just those sort of reasons.
623.
by Roboprog 10y ago
You are going to be lectured at length by the (OOP) static types crowd. And they have a point about using explicit types, when it's easy. That said, I wish the "strong types" crowd would take a look at all of the temporal
624.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Thank you. I find layered stuff much easier to understand than massive clutter with "housekeeping" and "domain logic" stirred together, as well. My IDE allows me to leave the "documentation" panel open attache
625.
by Roboprog 10y ago
We need to not work on the same project :-)
626.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Somebody, somewhere, is waiting until runtime to check for a property, and they will burn in Hell for their sins! Even if they don't do it very often, even if the IDE infers properties most of the time anyway, even if there's less
627.
by Roboprog 10y ago
True, but "batshit conservatives" won't do that, or will mess themselves if you do that, rather than making some kind of "Object-Whatever-Mapping" model and annotations. But that's what I would do (at least in
628.
by Roboprog 10y ago
There are some wrapper utilities for Java around reflection for property access, but yeah, it's still pretty clumsy.
629.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Yeah, Java has kind of "choked the ecosystem" for the last decade. That monster needs to retire before the industry can move forward (the language, at least, the JVM seems to work well). Java generics seem easy enough to instanti
630.
by Roboprog 10y ago
Thanks, the OCaml stuff looks interesting (Wikipedia examples for structural types). It feels like type inference meets duck typing, but that's a good thing.

More ›