amw-zero

39 ms·

421.
by amw-zero 6y ago
A FSM is simply a structure that progresses over time, where the next state is dependent on the previous state. By your usage of “goto,” I feel like you’re implying like this is a negative thing. But state is an inherent part of computation
422.
by amw-zero 6y ago
Yea, I agree with the appeal of co-working spaces in general, and do expect them to see an uptick. However, WeWork's model is simply atrocious from a business standpoint. They assume all of the risk and liability by being the leasee in
423.
by amw-zero 6y ago
These are some pretty cool examples, though a little too nitty gritty to communicate the practical importance of state machines. The truth is, state machines are so fundamental that programmers are not even aware that they are using them. M
424.
by amw-zero 6y ago
This is only true when considering a specific software design that implements the state machine. I'd say the most popular way to define a state machine in code is how Xstate does it: https://github.com/davidkpiano/
425.
by amw-zero 6y ago
The thought that WeWork will ever recover is comical. I’d be surprised if they are alive by summer.
426.
by amw-zero 6y ago
I guess it makes money because you shamelessly advertise in response to completely unrelated questions.
427.
by amw-zero 6y ago
Wow, I literally just watched his [Turing award acceptance speech]( https://youtu.be/I1lf2MBy3J4 ) last night. Horrible news. I remember thinking, it’s so difficult to pick one subject to dedicate your life to. He chose softw
428.
by amw-zero 6y ago
I was talking about your proposed solution, not the problem itself. Point free code does not inherently solve any problems, and it certainly doesn't solve the entire notion of technical debt.
429.
by amw-zero 6y ago
You need the word “science” to be defined?
430.
by amw-zero 6y ago
But covering all branches does not mean that the program doesn’t have any bugs. Things like condition coverage and modified condition / decision coverage exist because of this. You need to ensure that all possible inputs are handled co
431.
by amw-zero 6y ago
That doesn’t solve any problem that I have (or anyone has) encountered.
432.
by amw-zero 6y ago
The power of property-based testing is very appealing. I want to make sure people have realistic expectations though - it’s difficult to express properties for a lot of typical application behaviors. And, even if you can think of a property
433.
by amw-zero 6y ago
Thats a very strange analogy. A microscope allows you to directly see a small object. A metaphor hints at an object for you to visualize yourself, and the reference is imprecise. That’s exactly Djikstra’s point. And we can (and do) learn wi
434.
by amw-zero 6y ago
But “computing” to him meant programming. So most people are not computing in the sense that he’s talking about.
435.
by amw-zero 6y ago
He dislikes anthropomorphism because there is no real-world equivalent of logic, and he believes that we should attack the logic problem of software head-on. Creating a metaphor is great for abstracting what logic is actually doing, but it
436.
by amw-zero 6y ago
I didn’t find that useful. He’s not arguing that metaphors and anthropomorphism are not effective for teaching in general. He’s arguing that they hide the underlying mathematical and logical objects that programs represent, which lulls prog
437.
by amw-zero 6y ago
How is he wrong? The average person cannot program. The average person can use but not create software, that’s why computers are popular.
438.
by amw-zero 6y ago
Because it’s native to the platform. Seriously, that’s huge. The React Native toolchain is cumbersome to say the least. There’s something to say about a first-class library, meaning one that is being used exactly as designed. I mean, why do
439.
by amw-zero 6y ago
While there is accidental complexity, we can not measure what is or isn’t accidental. So I think the statement that the majority of complexity is accidental is completely made up. I also think it’s wrong. The majority of complexity in softw
440.
by amw-zero 6y ago
While true, this is also incredibly reductive. All of the preaching about making software more simple leads to nothing. Software, at the current scale of things we want to build, is inherently and unavoidably complex.
441.
by amw-zero 6y ago
I love writing Clojure, I just can’t live without static types.
442.
by amw-zero 6y ago
Why would a chat app do any things? Why does an application need to continuously grow to be useful?
443.
by amw-zero 6y ago
Let’s get to brass tacks... does it still have any possibility of flaky tests? If so, I’m out.
444.
by amw-zero 6y ago
That’s such an interesting perspective. I’d expect nothing less of Djikstra!
445.
by amw-zero 6y ago
A for loop is a language level construct, not logic right? Actually for is a great example of why DRY is necessary. Do you implement your own iteration mechanism every time, or do you use the provided tool (for) that your language has gener
446.
by amw-zero 6y ago
How did we come up with the concept of a function in a programming language before considering math? Everything I listed is an example of applying math to a problem. The math came first.
447.
by amw-zero 6y ago
What makes state hard to reason about mathematically? TLA+ has a very formal definition of state and time that can be model checked or used for proofs. I think the reason that this is such a common statement is exactly because people don’t
448.
by amw-zero 6y ago
My example was the relational model of data, which is literally a mathematical model of data storage. Other ones I can think of off the top of my head: - the DOM (an applied tree which is a graph) - everything to do with programming languag
449.
by amw-zero 6y ago
First, a codebase where you have to write every piece of logic by hand every time is much more constrained than an overly-DRY codebase. Let’s make sure that that’s clear. Then, it’s very difficult to give general advice because the usefulne
450.
by amw-zero 6y ago
I don’t understand this argument. It’s trivial to de-duplicate an abstraction by just inlining the code. How is that less efficient than duplicating code? At least in the meantime you get the benefit of shared code changes.

More ›