hbrn

17 ms·

151.
by hbrn 4y ago
In my experience nobody keeps track of which interfaces were wild guesses. And they look exactly the same to an outsider.
152.
by hbrn 4y ago
And then you get another typo in another JS file. So you convert it too. Rinse and repeat. In the end, all your application is now written in typescript, hooray. Only the number of defects stays the same. Puzzled, you start investigating, a
153.
by hbrn 4y ago
Even bigger danger is convincing yourself that you are the hero that eliminated a "class" of problems without a concrete evidence that the class exists or worth eliminating. After all, everyone is biased to build a story in their
154.
by hbrn 4y ago
> you have value in the USD because you know you're going to be able to use it No, you speculate that you're going to be able to use it. Like, you know, people did in Venezuela.
155.
by hbrn 4y ago
You keep strawmaning. Let me fix this for you: Therefore, cryptocurrency can sometimes be used for moral good. For example, anonymously supporting opposition in dictatorship regimes. Can you offer a better alternative than crypto?
156.
by hbrn 4y ago
It is true that Svelte and React bundles will grow at different speeds as the app grows. Redundancy gets compressed in React library, but it just stays there in Svelte. That said, since it is redundancy , I wonder if Svelte bundles are mor
157.
by hbrn 4y ago
> removing the Virtual DOM will not fix your problem Having seat belts will not fix car crash deaths. But it does make them less likely to occur, doesn't it?
158.
by hbrn 4y ago
> that is dangerous, because you’re likely to overlook some edge case or some unconsidered use case that may come back to bite you later. I know, and that's exactly why I don't like it. In my experience, lack of understanding b
159.
by hbrn 4y ago
> any new framework that didn't solve the problem VDOM did in some way, was dead on arrival. Most frameworks before and after React were solving that problem one way or another. The reason React won was that V = f(S) turned out to b
160.
by hbrn 4y ago
> So let's first back up and recognize that this earlier statement was flat out wrong. React does provide a systematic answer for this. Context was never a systematic answer. Even today the docs say: Apply it sparingly because i
161.
by hbrn 4y ago
> differentiator is how easy a framework makes it to shoot yourself in the foot I agree. In fact this goes beyond frontend frameworks. One should apply the same approach to all methodologies and practices: OKRs, TDD, Agile, etc. When fra
162.
by hbrn 4y ago
Can you expand a bit more on cognitive overhead in Solid? What are the examples?
163.
by hbrn 4y ago
I can Google all of that stuff, yet I don't see such articles about Google.
164.
by hbrn 4y ago
You should be very careful applying Chesterton’s Fence to software engineering. Oftentimes the knowledge why fence exists is more valuable than the fence itself. And the best way to (re-)obtain this knowledge is to remove the fence and
165.
by hbrn 4y ago
Only under assumption that you are writing perfect tests. But if you are capable of writing perfect tests, why haven't you written perfect software in the first place?
166.
by hbrn 4y ago
I don't see a difference. If you write good tests and use a tool (CI) that detects them going stale, tests will never be stale. If you write good comments and use a tool (code review) that detects them going stale, comments will never
167.
by hbrn 4y ago
You split developers in to two categories, but how do you know those are correct categories? What if there's another type of engineer that only knows about 200 and 400? My approach is that conventional knowledge doesn't need to be
168.
by hbrn 4y ago
> Could you summarize what you think my initial comment was arguing? In a lame "gotcha" attempt you took author's words extremely literally: "Let's see how you lose a debate against 2 x 2 = 5 believer. Haha, I&#x
169.
by hbrn 4y ago
> "Butthurt teenager". Ah, resorting to insults now? Again, re-read your own comments. I've matched a fraction of your insults and you're already getting upset. > How would you say the above line ranks in the goal
170.
by hbrn 4y ago
> assumptions - we’re a small, cohesive team of experienced & responsible engineers I found that pretty much any methodology works fine in a team like that. "Don’t comment the code" still sounds pretty crazy to me, but I ca
171.
by hbrn 4y ago
I'm not using debate tactics and not accusing others of doing it. I'm just debating. If you do want to switch topic to debate tactics, you should first re-read your own comments: they are full of strawman arguments, deflections, c
172.
by hbrn 4y ago
> Ah, yes, I guess if we had debated the "good parts" of Nazism then the invasion of Ukraine wouldn't have happened. Kind of. If more time was spent deconstructing Nazism/Fascism, instead of simply repeating "N
173.
by hbrn 4y ago
> I'm sorry you find denouncing and rejecting Nazism is boring. Evidently, simply denouncing and rejecting does nothing to prevent it from emerging again. All the raping and murdering in Ukraine is currently done in the name of deno
174.
by hbrn 4y ago
> Poverty is not having to eat No, that's famine. Poverty has many definitions, but generally it's not being able to meet a certain standard of living. It may include nutrition standards, but again, malnutrition in US is very d
175.
by hbrn 4y ago
You're supposed to both attack your opponent's position and defend yours. What you're describing is a lack of debate culture. A good example of that was already referred here (the infamous "so you're saying"
176.
by hbrn 4y ago
> I'm against "sex work" because women (it's women in the majority of cases) are trafficked and taken advantage of, in both a material and a direct physical way. That's a very naive and harmful take. Criminalizin
177.
by hbrn 4y ago
Losing doesn't have to mean you 100% agree with another party at the end. Learning something new and changing your original position is good enough. > someone thinks poverty is not upsetting Someone was able to find happiness in non
178.
by hbrn 4y ago
> don’t debate at all, just listen I disagree (pun intended). Debating allows you to understand your own position better, e.g. is it based on information, intuition, values, preference, experience, or bias? And it forces another party to
179.
by hbrn 4y ago
This is quite interesting, because I find Vaush to be a perfect match for your description: absolutely insufferable debate bro and a hypocrite (the whole "living your values" discussion was very showing). And Destiny to be a fairl
180.
by hbrn 4y ago
The alternative is pretending your house is a treasury and buying a lock which costs more than any other item in your house. While your roommate develops kleptomania.

More ›