Mastering Programming (2016) • Hacker News Board

Re: Mastering Programming (2016)

#121

Post by randomdata » Thu, Feb 15, 2024, 10:01 PM UTC

PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #120

randomdata wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is all just a defensive mechanism to try and dismiss the point. I figured. > What's going to happen is that over time you'll eventually have the experience to understand what's being described here. I've been around long enough to be aware of the surface level motivation – accepting the point without defensive dismissal would cause harm to your ego. I just don't get the appeal. Who cares about the ego? If you…

it'd be akin to someone arguing with a 10 year old about how they should feel losing someone they've been married to for over 40 years. That 10 year old just flat doesn't have the tools to understand so why bother. or to quote a meme. transparent poster is transparent.

But the question asked why you would bother, not why someone who has been married for 40 years would bother. You don't need to know anything about anyone else to answer the question.

It is recognized that you did answer the question. You said as a defence mechanism. That is understood. But the follow up is asking on deeper level: What needs to be defended against, exactly? What is that you think your ego going to do to you if you don't put up these defences?

Re: Mastering Programming (2016)

#122

Post by PH95VuimJjqBqy » Fri, Feb 16, 2024, 1:55 PM UTC

randomdata wrote: post #121

PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it'd be akin to someone arguing with a 10 year old about how they should feel losing someone they've been married to for over 40 years. That 10 year old just flat doesn't have the tools to understand so why bother. or to quote a meme. transparent poster is transparent.

But the question asked why you would bother, not why someone who has been married for 40 years would bother. You don't need to know anything about anyone else to answer the question. It is recognized that you did answer the question. You said as a defence mechanism. That is understood. But the follow up is asking on deeper level: What needs to be defended against, exactly? What is that you think your ego going to do…

watch me slice and dice so I can try and squeeze my rightness in between!

seriously man, nothing you say matters anymore as you don't have the experience necessary to even begin to understand what I'm saying.

just stop.

Re: Mastering Programming (2016)

#123

Post by randomdata » Fri, Feb 16, 2024, 2:39 PM UTC

PH95VuimJjqBqy wrote: post #122

randomdata wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the question asked why you would bother, not why someone who has been married for 40 years would bother. You don't need to know anything about anyone else to answer the question. It is recognized that you did answer the question. You said as a defence mechanism. That is understood. But the follow up is asking on deeper level: What needs to be defended against, exactly? What is that you think your ego going to do…

watch me slice and dice so I can try and squeeze my rightness in between! seriously man, nothing you say matters anymore as you don't have the experience necessary to even begin to understand what I'm saying. just stop.

That's just it, you're not saying anything.

The last coherent thought you had was an assertion that YAGNI may include not implementing extension points. But then DHH, while admittedly starting with a made up premise that made no sense, came along and obliterated that notion by the end, detailing how extension points – what he calls model, integration, and system – are necessary to keep tests sane.

And, since YANGI emphasizes testing, we can be assured it actually does include implementing integration points.