mrloba

6 ms·

31.
by mrloba 5y ago
I would also like to know, as I started on something similar myself. My plan was to allow calling an impure function from a pure function as long as the mutation was contained to state that had its entire lifetime within the pure function.
32.
by mrloba 6y ago
To me the biggest one is not understanding and solving the actual problem that needs to be solved. Instead people will solve problems that the business doesn't have, or technical issues that doesn't exist. Or just some mildly rela
33.
by mrloba 6y ago
Move your logic to pure functions. Use classes for plumbing. Now you can unit test the logic, and integration test the plumbing. You can easily test with a real database using docker for example. Note that you'll still use DI in this c
34.
by mrloba 6y ago
Removing things because of relative low usage often seems like flawed logic to me. Sometimes it makes sense (most users only use the most used features), but quite often a piece of software will consist of a large number of low-usage featur
35.
by mrloba 6y ago
Cloud tools for musicians. It's a pain setting up a new environment. So many plugins and libraries etc. Also, version control and backup. All manual.
36.
by mrloba 6y ago
Hopefully not a single org, or any org. But like I said, it's not easy to solve socially. The main point is to somehow get paid without advertising (Which already exists, it's just that people won't pay individually for every
37.
by mrloba 6y ago
How about we fix the underlying problem: how to earn money without advertising? The issue right now is that subscribing to 100s of different services is both annoying and expensive. What if you could subscribe to a single service, which the
38.
by mrloba 6y ago
Maybe slightly off topic, but.. I don't think this is really about taste. It's about "common ground" between programmers. If you've seen and used the second pattern many times before, it becomes part of your vocabul
39.
by mrloba 6y ago
I agree. Are there any good alternatives (except for personal blogs)?
40.
by mrloba 6y ago
Not really unfortunately. In typescript/javascript you have a few options, but none that are any good. In js you can freeze an object to avoid mutation, but there's a performance penalty and a lot of hassle. As for side effects, y
41.
by mrloba 6y ago
I completely agree. Just write pure functions as much as possible and you're good. What goes inside a function doesn't matter so long as the function itself is pure, imo
42.
by mrloba 6y ago
I don't understand why such a system needs to look at every data point. Are the failures so rare that you can't get away with sampling?
43.
by mrloba 6y ago
> I'd love any survey that showed some massive migration between vendors on a regular basis, but it does not exist. Isn't this a sign of existing lock-in? Also, I think lock-in comes in degrees. Some are worse than others. Even
44.
by mrloba 6y ago
I got so pissed off by this that I rang them up right after subscribing and cancelled. At least they lost one customer for it.
45.
by mrloba 6y ago
I tried this, and it's possible using a monadic interface. Just like replacing promise.then with async await you can replace monad.flatmap with generator yields. But I've already seen this concept discussed by the react team and i
46.
by mrloba 6y ago
Yes! I do something similar which is sometimes referred to as functional core imperative shell. My goal is to put as much code as possible in the computational/functional part. This part is easy to test since it's pure. The remain