dozzie

85 ms·

961.
by dozzie 9y ago
Do you apply the same approach to other tools? You don't know how to call a compiler? Don't know how to write a set of rules for your build system? Don't know how external libraries are loaded? Because if you work with networ
962.
by dozzie 9y ago
In other words, it's totally OK not to understand what you're working with?
963.
by dozzie 9y ago
> how easy it makes to create a DSL (without leaving it). Pretty much impossible. If you don't leave your original language, you don't use domain specific language , you just have general purpose language with domain specific
964.
by dozzie 9y ago
> As long as people can opt-out then it's fine. Not quite. If people can opt-out, then the ones that have little leverage against their (potential) employer -- precisely the ones that need this protection the most -- will be screwed
965.
by dozzie 9y ago
The problem is that Docker hides from its users details about network configuration, the same details that the users should understand and should know about. It's just bound to fail in any scenario other than Docker authors envisoned.
966.
by dozzie 9y ago
Long story short: Docker with its insistence on magically doing all the network configuration fails to cooperate with anything that is not a Docker. A side note, it's hilarious how Docker users are successfully insulated from networkin
967.
by dozzie 9y ago
> No matter how good you are, a large portion of companies and recruiters will autotrash your resume without an education section. If the company looks that closely to academic degrees, it most probably doesn't know how to hire staf
968.
by dozzie 9y ago
> You're new to this HN thing? No, not really. > Steve Yegge is kind well known around this here parts... Well, I haven't noticed. > Also you seem to be responding to the (meant as joke) title, not TFA. Actually, to TFA a
969.
by dozzie 9y ago
Why my programming languages are smarter than whatever dumb writer that knows nothing about my toolset and my needs is at hand with his trivial cliches.
970.
by dozzie 9y ago
> The problem [...] isn't being surreptitiously billed a large amount, it is cost of a critical service changing dramatically without warning. Sorry, but this is the risk of using somebody else's service -- especially Google&#x
971.
by dozzie 9y ago
I would say that Ansible, with its all SSH baggage, is quite poor method of running remote procedures, especially when it's mixed with maintaining configuration. But d'oh, it's the usual way people abuse it.
972.
by dozzie 9y ago
> I've seen so many developers build giant unwieldy images because there's been no easy way to manage build dependencies that didn't end with bloat. Uhm... What? No, there was, around two decades older than Docker itself.
973.
by dozzie 9y ago
How about moving any (all) calls to /usr/bin/ssh to run a script on a remote server? Like running deployment, upgrades, or creating home directories and mail folders for a new user? http://harpcaller.jarowit.net&#x
974.
by dozzie 9y ago
Don't. If you don't have in mind any particular quality that you are proud of or strive to have, any values you'll conceive will be bullshit.
975.
by dozzie 9y ago
Yes, but they continue to run while the library is being updated. That's the point. They can get restarted once the update process finishes, which takes a lot less time than be shut down, wait for update, and be started again. From wha
976.
by dozzie 9y ago
> services: they are specifically designed to be updated and restarted I write plenty of daemons (you call them "services"). What exactly do I write specifically for them to be able to continue to run when a library is upgraded
977.
by dozzie 9y ago
> It's an interesting problem. Live updates without requiring a restart is going to be a complex task, how do you reload a library in use by a program without crashing it? Well, how do Linux and other unices do that?
978.
by dozzie 9y ago
It works better to keep a version controlled indiscriminate list of every single project and position and assignment and achievement you've ever done (plus a resume template). With that you can easily choose relevant points for a speci
979.
by dozzie 9y ago
Cryptography is one prominent example. Modern compilers would be another (though an amateur can go here a little farther than in others, because of parser generators and such). Operating systems more sophisticated than a toy-grade proof of
980.
by dozzie 9y ago
> Ehhhh, it is possible to learn just about anything on your own if you are interested enough. Not really. There are several fields that have two types of learning material available: most basic and trivial stuff only good for showing of
981.
by dozzie 9y ago
> Yet, if I sat down and decided to build my own computer language or operating system from scratch, I bet I’d learn a lot of interesting things along the way. Or, in some fields, you would learn nothing at all, because you would hit a b
982.
by dozzie 9y ago
I don't like when somebody tells me that I should do something, especially with so weak arguments (almost all of them in the article were superficialities about syntax). Not to mention that JVM as a runtime virtually disqualifies t
983.
by dozzie 9y ago
DRM is data asking "dear program, please don't let to copy me". It falls apart the moment you have anything to interpret data that doesn't honour this request. Encryption, on the other hand, is a technically sound idea.
984.
by dozzie 9y ago
HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO FIX YOUR BROKEN CAPSLOCK
985.
by dozzie 9y ago
> Work on large systems long enough and immutability becomes a very valuable concept. On the other hand, if you work on medium-sized systems (and those are much more common than large ones), immutability is too expensive to work with
986.
by dozzie 9y ago
The thing is, you are signing hash of a hash of data instead of simply hash of data.
987.
by dozzie 9y ago
It's funny how you're too expensive for what his team cannot do.
988.
by dozzie 9y ago
> I don't see how it would be stupid. What computer-related fields call merely impedance mismatch between the tool and the job, in cryptography always ends up as catastrophic results. This is how it would be stupid. And add to that
989.
by dozzie 9y ago
> How come there is no initiative to build an online voting system that use a blockchain as a mean to secure the process ? Because the very idea of using document timestamping service to vote is stupid. Voting has different needs and thu
990.
by dozzie 9y ago
> Second is the fragmentation of the .NET frameworks [...] [you get monoliths] or a proliferation of satellite packages. And I don't see why "proliferation of satellite packages" is supposed to be bad. It works in Debian&#

More ›