111–120 of 325 posts
I think the corollary to the title (to turn it around on the author) is not 'Code is read more than written' but 'code that can't be read won't run for long'. Disclaimer: Experienced sysadmin trying to make a lateral move to development and as such a complete noob.
There's plenty of ossified code people are scared to touch because they don't understand it, but stake their business on it :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The infinite sum of powers of 2 indeed diverges in the real numbers. However, in the 2-adic numbers, it does actually equal -1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-adic_number
Eh, P-adic numbers basically write the digits backwards, so "-1" has very little relation to a normal -1.
I think the corollary to the title (to turn it around on the author) is not 'Code is read more than written' but 'code that can't be read won't run for long'. Disclaimer: Experienced sysadmin trying to make a lateral move to development and as such a complete noob.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be nice, but people keep hiring based upon specific programming languages and other programming specific skills.
You usually don't want work companies that do resume matching.
TIL of ≹, which "articulates a relationship where neither of the two compared entities is greater or lesser than the other, yet they aren't necessarily equal either. This nuanced distinction is essential in areas where there are different ways to compare entities that aren't strictly numerical." ( https://www.mathematics-monster.com/symbols/Neither-Greater-... )
Likewise, TIL. In your link however it states "Example 1: Numerical Context Let's consider two real numbers, a and b. If a is neither greater than nor less than b, but they aren't explicitly equal, the relationship is ≹" How can that be possible?
For many of us, running our code 1 billion times will cost less than a few minutes of a developer's time. Hell, I could spend $200 for a month of server time on AWS and run a lot of my (web API) code 100 billion times. Optimizing for human readers is always better until you're working on something that proves itself to be too slow to be economical anymore.
(And most of your users don't have developer's salary, or developer's quality of life, so it hurts them that many times more.)
--
[0] - Yes, wasting someone's time reduces QALY.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Likewise, TIL. In your link however it states "Example 1: Numerical Context Let's consider two real numbers, a and b. If a is neither greater than nor less than b, but they aren't explicitly equal, the relationship is ≹" How can that be possible?
That doesn't seem possible with the reals. An example from programming that comes to mind is NaN ≹ NaN (in some languages).
Edit: Not in many programming languages. In IEEE-754 inf == inf. In SymPy too oo == oo, although it's a bit controversial. Feels sketchy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that's right. I just feel that latency is sometimes missing from the discussions re. developer efficiency vs paying more for compute.
Yep. Theres a huge experiential difference between something happening instantly and it happening in 200ms or so. Especially when typing or playing video games.
If you don't fit in the budget for the specific task, your product features don't matter much.
One could say that the test runs were run more than the code was read (of course), but in production? Definitely the same order of magnitude for a long time.
For many of us, running our code 1 billion times will cost less than a few minutes of a developer's time. Hell, I could spend $200 for a month of server time on AWS and run a lot of my (web API) code 100 billion times. Optimizing for human readers is always better until you're working on something that proves itself to be too slow to be economical anymore.