jeremiep

12 ms·

61.
by jeremiep 9y ago
We definitely need more developers who can't leverage more than 10% of the CPU's actual power.</sarcasm> Its literally impossible to have any clue about performance without understanding the hardware. Sure you can profi
62.
by jeremiep 9y ago
Its usually only after a while you realize almost every piece of meaningful data is relational. It just didn't look that way when the project started. But now you're committed on the wrong database and its very costly to switch ba
63.
by jeremiep 9y ago
I lost count of the number of web projects I had to work on that could be rewritten in a tenth of the code, for more performance, better maintainability and less entanglement between components. Both on the server side and on the client sid
64.
by jeremiep 9y ago
But 80% availability is also pretty weak. Especially for CSS stuff where fallbacks are usually hard or impossible to implement cleanly. This isn't javascript where you can just throw a polyfill (and even there, you're usually trad
65.
by jeremiep 9y ago
Since when does checkout needs to be an "experience"? I'd much rather trust Paypal than a company worried about losing track of me or that I might see a different branding. That different branding is the very reason I'm
66.
by jeremiep 9y ago
And then people wonder why Agile never produces quality results. Intellisense has replaced the need to read the docs and Agile has replaced the need to understand what you're doing. Its no surprise that basic knowledge found in the doc
67.
by jeremiep 9y ago
Its not a whitelist of domains, but of applications allowed to use the agent. Right now Blizzard is blacklisting only the browsers from using it, but that still leaves a bunch of other things like slack and whatnot. Its indeed a very strang
68.
by jeremiep 9y ago
Simplicity is about the cognitive overhead to understand code, the simpler it is the less effort it requires to reason about. That doesn't mean you don't have to learn anything to understand it. Going the easy route usually mean
69.
by jeremiep 9y ago
It has to do with licenses. They're shipping the last GPLv2 version of bash for one, the new versions are on GPLv3. I don't get why people bash things when they clearly don't understand the full context (pun intended ;)
70.
by jeremiep 9y ago
org-mode is one of my favorite discoveries in recent years. I'm now only using Markdown when I absolutely have to and live in org-mode for everything else. And I've only just began scratching the surface of org's features!
71.
by jeremiep 9y ago
The very same could be said of Rails. I for one absolutely hated working in Ruby and especially Rails because I'm incredibly spoiled from Clojure. Why would anyone bother using a language without live coding that has tons of syntax iss
72.
by jeremiep 9y ago
That's not always true, the best cases for inlining one-use functions is when you don't introduce new local variables. I've seen 1k LoCs functions that were incredibly easy to understand, and 10 liners that were complete gibb
73.
by jeremiep 9y ago
It really depends on the context of the problem being solved. Some problems become more complex when modularized like this. Splitting functions is basically adding indirections and spreading the context all over the place. For reusable task
74.
by jeremiep 9y ago
I agree about modularity and encapsulation being important. Usually I try to weight the overhead of having more function prototypes to track, indirections in the main function and whatnot versus the overhead of having it all inlined. A lot
75.
by jeremiep 9y ago
Having a lot of single-use functions, even if properly named, still splits the context in that many pieces. For some cases that results in more confusing code.
76.
by jeremiep 9y ago
So you're saying we should drop whatever unification WHATWG brings and leave everyone to do their own thing? That's certainly going to end well. Saying "wake up" is a very dangerous statement; usually hints at ignorance
77.
by jeremiep 9y ago
And how are things ever going to work without standards? Standards aren't meant for end-users, they're meant for the engineers building the freaking software end-users are using. Imagine every electrical device in your home having
78.
by jeremiep 9y ago
Unless you restart your server 400 times a day, how does startup times matter, even remotely?
79.
by jeremiep 9y ago
Sorry I misread your first comment. Its still possible for dynamic languages to have auto-completion. There's way more information available at runtime than at compile-time. Besides, IDEs tend to have the entire world in most autocompl
80.
by jeremiep 9y ago
Saying dynamic languages are for novices hints more at you being one than anything else. Not everyone likes IDEs (Emacs and VIM are still by far superior to many) and not everyone wants to deal with all the extra code and boilerplate and ad
81.
by jeremiep 9y ago
This is to script spreadsheets, not build the next Netflix. I would hate a typed language in there. Besides most static typing systems are ridiculously weak and introduce more headaches than they actually solve.
82.
by jeremiep 9y ago
Its also great at validating data! We're running some of our specs in production to enforce guarantees on data coming in and out of the app :)
83.
by jeremiep 9y ago
Wasn't that the joke when the book was first released? All design patterns merely handle the lack of anonymous and first-class functions.
84.
by jeremiep 9y ago
Basically you evolve the language into the domain of the application. Rather than lowering the application into the domain of the language. Emacs-lisp is one example of a Lisp that has evolved into the domain of text editing.
85.
by jeremiep 9y ago
I've been using spacemacs for nearly 2 years now and autocomplete has mostly always worked right out of the box after installing the corresponding layer. I rarely even need to reboot Emacs.
86.
by jeremiep 9y ago
I did the exact opposite, I got tired of vanilla Emacs and managing my custom configuration. Then I found about Spacemacs and never looked back. I didn't get any strange bugs or slowdowns, but then I am using the `develop` branch which
87.
by jeremiep 9y ago
I've been using Emacs for years but only started using Magit this year, what a fantastic Git client. It makes everything trivial to do, even rebases become safe and friendly. Its definitely a git client on a league of its own.
88.
by jeremiep 9y ago
I've already been using .3 for a while, just switch to the `develop` branch :)
89.
by jeremiep 9y ago
I don't think Jenkins is a good indication of modern Java :) If anything Jenkins is a hairy ball of mud you should try to avoid :p I write exclusively Clojure on the JVM now; its like having all the advantages of the JVM and none of t
90.
by jeremiep 9y ago
I wrote the most non-idiomatic C# in Unity to create a lighting fast 2D skeletal animation system (100-1000x the performance of the closest competitor) and I'm certain I could've gained yet another order of magnitude had I access

More ›