Autocomplete from Stack Overflow • Hacker News Board

Re: Autocomplete from Stack Overflow

#61

Post by creed0r » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 2:46 PM UTC

Probs for the idea. Nice thinking!

I guess we as programmers should seriously think about the future of our craft.

If, for example, we feel we are basically using the same building blocks over and over again, we should seriously think about organizing libraries and code snippets and questions asking for such snippets in an organized way and provide ways to transpile 1 solution in different languages etc..

We should not accept the current state of our craft as final and rather think about how to improve in general.

If for instance something like StackOverflow has become the Wikipedia of Code then let's think hard about how to make into a full blown tool, with all the features and semantics we need. It was a nice project the way it started and grew but it doesn't have to stay like that forever!

Re: Autocomplete from Stack Overflow

#62

Post by hbt » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 2:49 PM UTC

It still astounds me that we haven't solved reusable modules in 2016.

Sure, we have libraries, apis, package managers etc. but every time I read a code base, there is always a utility function reinventing the wheel.

Someone wrote it because it is still difficult to discover modular code and reuse it easily.

It's pretty nuts when you think about it. Imagine mechanical engineers having to recreate the same CAD file because they can't find a component with the same functionality (which does happen but for other reasons e.g intellectual property).

But we don't have the same intellectual property challenges and yet the best tools we have to discover and reuse code are 90s search engines that treat code as raw text with zero contextual understanding and often outdated code snippets.

PS: I love your project btw.

Re: Autocomplete from Stack Overflow

#63

Post by matt4077 » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 2:49 PM UTC

falcolas wrote: post #45

A great way to increase your liability in an automated fashion! Sure, the code on Stack Overflow is licensed as MIT... but what assurance is there that the code which was posted is original property that the poster owns copyright to? What assurance is there that the posters won't claim patents on the methods being used? The risk is low, but it's certainly not 0. Big companies caution their software developers to not…

It's fortunately not _that_ easy to get a software patent. It'd be quite difficult to patent something that's the length of an average stackoverflow answer. There's also a lower limit on the length (and originality) for copyright which I doubt many answers reach.

Re: Autocomplete from Stack Overflow

#64

Post by micampe » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 2:51 PM UTC

thebouv wrote: post #41

joslin01 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So that interviewers can gauge your ability on searching & referencing code examples from the web? Who's being realistic?

I've often told people that I'm just a good programmer, but a phenomenal Googler. Even in interviews. Being able to search and separate the wheat from the chaff is most definitely a skill. Unless you always want to be reinventing wheels.

Yeah but when you found the wheat you still need to know how to make bread.

Re: Autocomplete from Stack Overflow

#65

Post by thoradam » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 2:54 PM UTC

hbt wrote: post #62

It still astounds me that we haven't solved reusable modules in 2016. Sure, we have libraries, apis, package managers etc. but every time I read a code base, there is always a utility function reinventing the wheel. Someone wrote it because it is still difficult to discover modular code and reuse it easily. It's pretty nuts when you think about it. Imagine mechanical engineers having to recreate the same CAD file bec…

This is one of the best qualities of languages like Haskell, the type system promotes discovery and true reuse of code. There has even been research into specifying dependencies as 'something that implements this signature' rather than specific packages.

Re: Autocomplete from Stack Overflow

#66

Post by braythwayt » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 2:56 PM UTC

I have a good feeling about this:

https://vimeo.com/76141334

This is exactly the direction we should be going. We build the world's most sophisticated engines for predicting human social behaviour, why are we stuck in the 1990s when it comes to autocomplete for a tightly scoped domain like writing software?

Bravo!

Re: Autocomplete from Stack Overflow

#67

Post by Xorlev » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 2:57 PM UTC

bikamonki wrote: post #58

OliverJones wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like the car mechanic who goes to the used-parts dealer (the junkyard) and grabs the first part with the same size screw holes as the broken part.

Did you just call SO a junkyard?

If the shoe fits...

Re: Autocomplete from Stack Overflow

#68

Post by AnkhMorporkian » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 3:01 PM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #50

Uehreka wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...12 hours of involuntary surgery later: There, now you're a facebook clone.

This is close to a real pun it would do, and nearly just as dire. It's fixed in recent versions, but it used to not understand emergencies. If you said "Siri, call me an ambulance," it would come back with "OK, I'll call you 'an ambulance' from now on."

That's both tragic and hilarious.

Re: Autocomplete from Stack Overflow

#69

Post by Tau_Zero » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 3:01 PM UTC

hbt wrote: post #62

It still astounds me that we haven't solved reusable modules in 2016. Sure, we have libraries, apis, package managers etc. but every time I read a code base, there is always a utility function reinventing the wheel. Someone wrote it because it is still difficult to discover modular code and reuse it easily. It's pretty nuts when you think about it. Imagine mechanical engineers having to recreate the same CAD file bec…

One big reason I've seen people "reinventing" small utilities and modules is to avoid external dependencies, both for licensing and management hassle.

Re: Autocomplete from Stack Overflow

#70

Post by anexprogrammer » Tue, Mar 22, 2016, 3:03 PM UTC

hbt wrote: post #62

It still astounds me that we haven't solved reusable modules in 2016. Sure, we have libraries, apis, package managers etc. but every time I read a code base, there is always a utility function reinventing the wheel. Someone wrote it because it is still difficult to discover modular code and reuse it easily. It's pretty nuts when you think about it. Imagine mechanical engineers having to recreate the same CAD file bec…

It gets more daft when every time someone tries to solve the problem, they make it worse. See the 200 version of visual C++ restributable you end up installed.

I'm tempted to say developers shouldn't have been able to target specific dll versions, but that would cause different problems.