Where is the Spring dependency injection stuff? You can't just hard code all your Factories in FizzBuzz.java, you need to specify everything using XML so you can switch Factories without going through a recompilation.
Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
41–50 of 171 posts
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#42I've often wondered - is it the language that spawns this or the mindset of the developer (or both?)
I see this primarily in Java or .NET shops - massive layer upon layer, code generation, factories, classes, etc. - when a simple architecture would be best. Why do we get these insane things to begin with? What's going on?
It feels sort of like premature scaling (what if we have millions of programmers - we need more abstractions!) combined with misuse/misapplication of design patterns.
You'll never* see stuff like this in Ruby on Rails, JavaScript, Python projects, etc. I'm curious how one goes from a simple, elegant program to over-engineered monstrosities.
* Hardly ever. I haven't in > 7 years.
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
"in my head I went, this is why the whole ms enterprise stack sucks balls." Brilliant. So, if some random programmer built some way-over-complicated Javascript solution, would you think that the entire web platform "sucks balls"? "the sad part is that they actually think it's good to abstract away something really simple." Who is they ? Microsoft, this random c# guy or all c# programmers? If you answer anything but "…
The problem isn't random programmers, it is a culture and tool ecosystem which says that this is the right way to do things. If it were just one random programmer, there would be nothing to complain about. If some guy decides to write his website in his own dialect of Visual Basic, that isn't really being inflicted on anyone but his employees. The deeply-nested StrategyFactory stuff is an infection which worst affect…
So, you should be able to show me dozens of tools that are the default choice within these ecosystems, that make programmers build things in this way.
Can you please name some tools and tell us how they say this is the right way to do things?
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
"in my head I went, this is why the whole ms enterprise stack sucks balls." Brilliant. So, if some random programmer built some way-over-complicated Javascript solution, would you think that the entire web platform "sucks balls"? "the sad part is that they actually think it's good to abstract away something really simple." Who is they ? Microsoft, this random c# guy or all c# programmers? If you answer anything but "…
so overcomplicated javascript is not overcomplicated? i just started working on microsoft enterprise garbage. ever had to deal with sharepoint, dynamics? even microsoft developers say you're doomed when you're being put on a sharepoint project. I just codereviewed code for 2 different dynamics contractors. Both highly recommended by microsoft. both of them had high levels of abstractions, but the end result was tight…
Say what you want about the culture but I've found MS's stack to be quite good with the right team. It's got some great features. LINQ in particular springs to mind.
There are plenty of terrific systems built atop that stock. StackOverflow is implemented in ASP.NET, for instance.
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#45God... this is particularly painful because I remember first seeing this in a thread on boards.4chan.org/g/... and now, several months later, here it is on hacker news.
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#46Where is the Spring dependency injection stuff? You can't just hard code all your Factories in FizzBuzz.java, you need to specify everything using XML so you can switch Factories without going through a recompilation.
Exactly. No Spring, no Maven...I mean, come on. Plus, I'd like to see some Camel routing defined for sending my crucial FizzBuzz results to various endpoints.
Oh yeah, and what about when I want to run scheduled FizzBuzz? Obviously I need Quartz, which requires...more XML!
Let's not get into the necessity of making a FizzBuzz OSGi bundle - we'll tackle that in the next iteration.
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
so overcomplicated javascript is not overcomplicated? i just started working on microsoft enterprise garbage. ever had to deal with sharepoint, dynamics? even microsoft developers say you're doomed when you're being put on a sharepoint project. I just codereviewed code for 2 different dynamics contractors. Both highly recommended by microsoft. both of them had high levels of abstractions, but the end result was tight…
Say what you want about the culture but I've found MS's stack to be quite good with the right team. It's got some great features. LINQ in particular springs to mind. There are plenty of terrific systems built atop that stock. StackOverflow is implemented in ASP.NET, for instance.
dude! microsoft is not just enterprise. they have the biggest r&d lab with some really awesome shit going on.
linq is made by the haskell guy. well the haskell guy was a microsoft guy. but you get the idea. it did not grow inside of the .net enterprise culture. it grew outside of it. I never had any qualms about c# as a language. but that's also not what we're discussing.
just like f# is wonderful. but it too did not grow inside, but outside. they're being really smart about tying it into the enterprise as much as possible therefore guaranteeing it's future though.
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#48Startup edition:
* provision one ec2 instance per number to check
* assign numeric order based on uptime in msec using zookeeper
* serve result via json
* render it on the client.Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#49I'm disappointed. They could have removed the if/else blocks by dynamically selecting the strategy and abstracted the loop. B-
;)
Tempted to send this to my Java colleagues.
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#50I've often wondered - is it the language that spawns this or the mindset of the developer (or both?) I see this primarily in Java or .NET shops - massive layer upon layer, code generation, factories, classes, etc. - when a simple architecture would be best. Why do we get these insane things to begin with? What's going on? It feels sort of like premature scaling (what if we have millions of programmers - we need more…
Part of it is "customers want it", part of it is because people are taught "abstraction is good", rather than "abstraction can be useful".
So folks abstract everything, because they don't stop to think about whether it makes sense.
You know, just in case the day comes when they need to send requests using carrier pigeons instead of TCP. They never stop to think whether "in a world where we need carrier pigeons, would this app be useful anyway?"