Ask HN: Examples of reliable software you enjoy using
41–50 of 666 posts
Re: Ask HN: Examples of reliable software you enjoy using
#42Don't know how I'd get by without this for ad hoc / exploratory .NET work. Love it.
Re: Ask HN: Examples of reliable software you enjoy using
#43Files auto save, so a crash, or even accidental close will not cause you to lose anything. Also handles massive files, which is nice. On top of being a nice, very configurable code editor,
Re: Ask HN: Examples of reliable software you enjoy using
#44haproxy and redis are the two that come to mind. Not necessarily because they make me happy , but they never seem to make me angry or sad. Which with most infrastructure software is rare.
Terraform is surprisingly painless for new-ish software.
Re: Ask HN: Examples of reliable software you enjoy using
#45IntelliJ Idea is head and shoulders better than many other IDEs, particularly Eclipse in the reliability department.
Re: Ask HN: Examples of reliable software you enjoy using
#46Incredibly powerful, very reliable, thoroughly worth the pricetag - and I don't love subscription software.
It's generally a joy to use. And I can't think of another piece of powerful visual creation software that is.
Re: Ask HN: Examples of reliable software you enjoy using
#47On the server side of things: nginx, haproxy, redis, memcached, cron, logrotate, Linux
And controversially (probably since I've learned their quirks): MySQL, Nagios.
They all just... work. I use these tools to set up a server, and after configured, the VM usually goes down before they do.
On the flip side of things, tools I have to use and highly resent their lack of reliability: collectd, Docker, Safari/IE/Firefox/Chrome, OSX.
Re: Ask HN: Examples of reliable software you enjoy using
#48Re: Ask HN: Examples of reliable software you enjoy using
#49I used to think bash was on that list... it seems relatively responsive and predictable. I use it all the time.
But then I realized how often bash has weird issues -- like completion hanging, or inexplicable inability to complete (this could be due to the distro though). Or it just seems easy to get it in a bad state by hitting the wrong keys, or dumping a binary file to the terminal.
And recently I have been looking through the bash source code, and it's a bit horrifying. The reliability is done by brute force of special cases over decades, not by good design.
I like the semantics of the shell language, in that it lets me get things done fast. But I don't like the syntax or the implementation I happen to use. bash is pretty complete, but not well implemented.