he0001

34 ms·

331.
by he0001 9y ago
But that is still not asynchronous in relation to the program flow. Running other unrelated tasks is not asynchronous like that, it's concurrent execution. Asynchronous would mean that something that share context, time or execution, i
332.
by he0001 9y ago
Can you describe where this would be the case?
333.
by he0001 9y ago
Of course the they can, but that's not the thing here and it's about JS. The "lock" here is the event loop, and that's the issue. I don't understand the part where the database is doing work is in any way relat
334.
by he0001 9y ago
The first example in this article is misleading, imo, since the actual execution is synchronous, not asynchronous. The "programming style" is asynchronous, yes, but the execution will ALWAYS be the way its described since there ar
335.
by he0001 9y ago
Well just because static typing isn't present in your language the benefits of the concept is still something one has to consider in a non static language. My experience of people coming from non static typed languages to a non static
336.
by he0001 9y ago
For me static typing is one less thing to think about and I can concentrate on the problem.
337.
by he0001 9y ago
The .net core platform is miles better than the old .net platform, so for everyone used to the old one, that's a major improvement. But it's still not good enough platform compared to many others and not interesting enough in othe
338.
by he0001 9y ago
Or expressed more frankly, try to eat the cooked dinner before it's cooked...
339.
by he0001 9y ago
Agile isn't working, mostly because people focus on the processes. The thing they forget is the tech. If it takes days or weeks to verify that your code works how agile can you be? Or it's impossible to develop anything new becaus
340.
by he0001 9y ago
"Windows Linux" my eyes hurt... And now Microsoft bury windows desktop/server and take the full step and use Linux as the kernel!
341.
by he0001 9y ago
+10 I just wonder how the pushback of these techs will look like, because that's what's going to happen when everything is in an disarray and a mess. Someone still have to clean things up on Saturday at 3 o'clock in the night
342.
by he0001 9y ago
Well, assuming that you are adding features in parallel you have an history. You have a branch with feature A and are about to build feature B, which is now based on A, someone else is building feature C which is also based on A. Building B
343.
by he0001 9y ago
Even if I think the Author have a point, isn't the assumption of Googles hiring practices flawed since they are making an selection of an already biased selection, meaning hiring from the top tech institutions in the world?
344.
by he0001 9y ago
They are there because they are used to think that way. It's conways law written all over it... There's no actual reason for them to do it. They replaced their paperwork with a system that does the same thing. Fraudulent transacti
345.
by he0001 9y ago
It's not requirements by "what to do" but the requirements of "what we need to make "what to do"" work. For example if you are going to add two numbers you have to use some sort of arithmetic to solve that
346.
by he0001 9y ago
This "lag" is there mostly because historical reasons, not technical.
347.
by he0001 9y ago
> The minute you start two db transactions within one script you have eventual consistency. Well it's all about errors (and subsequently about control and correctness). Even if you have two transactions you are able to undo the othe
348.
by he0001 9y ago
Well that's the entire problem, you are not the one making the requirements, the solution of the problem does... You can't eat dinner before you have made it. Edit: I would argue that you can't write a system which is open (s
349.
by he0001 9y ago
And by "one solution fits all" I mean CQRS.
350.
by he0001 9y ago
While event sourcing is a quite alright tech for certain problems, this idea of "one solution fits all" is just ridiculous. Also the idea of "eventual consistency" is highly situational particularly in an distributed sol
351.
by he0001 9y ago
No! Async/await is a horrible construct. Keep it away from Java.
352.
by he0001 9y ago
Good move Oracle! Don't f*k this up now!
353.
by he0001 9y ago
This is kind of weird rule since a MS is said to contain 1k loc. And having a full team (other than one guy) for 1k loc is... well how can you screw up so little code? The hard part isn't the teams. The hard part is to know what a MS s
354.
by he0001 9y ago
I think it's interesting that you haven't got an answer from someone for this question. What you are describing is the problem people tend to ignore when describing microservices. The second solution won't help you with these
355.
by he0001 9y ago
For me TDD is mainly three things. Firstly it’s about testing myself so I’ve understood the task properly before writing any code at all. In this step I also can tell if my code is doing too much and therefore can tell if my method or funct
356.
by he0001 9y ago
This! So much this! I salute this guy!
357.
by he0001 9y ago
I think MS users are more prone to spend money because they are more used to it.
358.
by he0001 9y ago
While it's possible to have thousands of these processes running, it's completely up to the problem domain for it to be useful. If it wouldn't be bound by the problem domain you wouldn't need to write actors either.
359.
by he0001 9y ago
Wouldn't it a bit reasonable to be able to use an AI program to tell which AI program is the best? That would be a some sort of Turing test by itself? And if not, so much for AI?
360.
by he0001 9y ago
Use a AI program to answer that question!

More ›