fckgnad

15 ms·

61.
by fckgnad 4y ago
If you've been programming for 30 years, it doesn't show. I'm sorry. This is what a relation is: https://www.techopedia.com/definition/21677/relation in the context of relational databases. I think
62.
by fckgnad 4y ago
The distinction between smalltalk and other oop languages is not relevant. The majority of the human race thinks of java as oop and is referring to such languages when communicating. Please do the same.
63.
by fckgnad 4y ago
>I'm not sure object oriented programming ever really caught on. Uh they have. They were the dominant paradigm for a long time. You haven't been around long enough. I'm going to be real with you, a lot of what you say show
64.
by fckgnad 4y ago
>I think too many people try and discuss tools based on things that aren't relevant or are idealistic or that remove the nuance from the argument. Some people think the universe is just apple and oranges. Everything is a tool that c
65.
by fckgnad 4y ago
If you want static checks it needs to be done separately from the main language. What I find is that a good ide or editor is capable of doing this for a string if you tell it what that string is. Static checks are not a reason to create a w
66.
by fckgnad 4y ago
I stated in my first post that the proper abstraction is an extension to SQL. It is ok to extend a language to cover missing features or correct mistakes. Typescript and sass are extensions, that's why they are good. ORMs are not exten
67.
by fckgnad 4y ago
I completely agree. I think it's ocd thing. Programmers turn to ORMs because they appear elegant as it gets rid of string manipulation. You need a higher level perspective shift to realize that the orm is actually the uglier abstractio
68.
by fckgnad 4y ago
It's a generality that's generally true. It's also common sense. For the same reason why Translating python to ruby is generally and obviously pointless. The main thing that makes ORMs alluring is that people don't like
69.
by fckgnad 4y ago
>The role of ORM is to convert relations (sets of tuples) into the object structures our applications usually model data as. I am saying this transformation step is pointless. It's a leftover philosophy from a time when everyone tho
70.
by fckgnad 4y ago
ORMs are bad because it's a high level abstraction on top of a high level abstraction. SQL is already high level, so it's pointless to build on top of it. It also makes things much much more harder as SQL is a leaky abstraction an
71.
by fckgnad 4y ago
I kept making comments because nobody answered. I now have answers thanks.
72.
by fckgnad 4y ago
I'm looking for a person who has done BOTH meth and MDMA and I want him to compare the experience of each. My guess is that Meth operates on another level of profoundness, one that is both different and significantly higher then MDMA.
73.
by fckgnad 4y ago
I am not comparing coke and MDMA nor am I comparing LSD. I know the profiles of those drugs I am not referring to that. Those drugs have less overlap with MDMA. Have you done MDMA AND heroin/Meth? More important meth. Because these dru
74.
by fckgnad 4y ago
The topic at hand here is not hallucinogenic drugs. MDMA is not hallucinogenic. The topic at hand is centered around drugs that generate pleasure. You're a little left field with hallucinogenic drugs. I'm sure there's some so
75.
by fckgnad 4y ago
I'm just taking it up a level. I'm guessing the meth user looks at you and says, "You clearly haven't taken Meth." If MDMA users claim it's profound, is it really the same in the eyes of a meth user who has don
76.
by fckgnad 4y ago
I already stated the risk is irrelevant to the discussion. Here's a better way to phrase the question. Has someone who has taken both MDMA, heroin and Meth care to explain the differences in "profoundness" or "life affir
77.
by fckgnad 4y ago
All feelings, drug induced, or not aren't really there. None of it is real. Truth is just an expression. I use it in the same light as "profoundness". I understand the stigma associated with the drug. But the emotions generat
78.
by fckgnad 4y ago
Another perspective: The box was never meant to be open. We are not meant to understand the full truth of the universe. There are other boxes too, each box with a slightly different experience and each with a different price to pay. The pri
79.
by fckgnad 4y ago
Strongly typed languages already did take over the software development paradigm. It happened when Java, C++ and C were the dominant languages. Then it regressed back to dynamically typed languages as ruby, php, python and js skyrocketed in
80.
by fckgnad 4y ago
Important distinction: Are types worth it? Yes. Is typescript worth it? Maybe.
81.
by fckgnad 4y ago
Exactly. My post is the realization of two things: 1. All of us reading this post are more likely to be part of the 80. We are all likely delusional and we are all likely to be wrong. 2. The second thing to realize is that one person out of
82.
by fckgnad 4y ago
Don't you find it strange that YOU live in a world where everyone else but YOU thinks that everyone else around them is over engineering or under engineering things? You're not the guy who thinks everyone else is a maniac and is d
83.
by fckgnad 4y ago
Nooo acronyms are horrible. When you have hundreds of services that are acronyms it becomes a nightmare.
84.
by fckgnad 4y ago
I disagree. But cute is better than a fucking acronym. Never never never use acronyms or one letter variable names.
85.
by fckgnad 4y ago
No. I know what DI is. The debate is similar to imperative vs. OOP. But this is not exactly what I am referring to. Literally look at the second example, it's DI over and over and over again. I am referring to DI 100%. Function composi
86.
by fckgnad 4y ago
The Dependency injection pattern is just not that great in general. There are alternative patterns that are better. It is not a problem with frameworks. Think about it. If the pattern was good, then a good framework must exist. If no good f
87.
by fckgnad 4y ago
I see, my mistake.
88.
by fckgnad 4y ago
Yes. For functional programming it is a required optimization for performant programs. This is because loops don't exist in functional programming. The base way of imitating looping in functional programming is recursion then building
89.
by fckgnad 4y ago
Yes, you're right. My mistake.
90.
by fckgnad 4y ago
They're talking about the developers working on spark and K8? That's different. But I don't think they are talking about that. They are more likely talking about using these tools.

More ›