Please note that GitHub no longer supports Internet Explorer versions 7 or 8. How ironic. This covers so many enterprise programmers with locked down Windows PCs.
What are the chances that a company that locks down on IE will let them use github
Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
101–110 of 171 posts
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#102I'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…
I wonder too. I write a very atypical brand of Java (I like to think of it as "unencumbered Java"). I sometimes even use public fields instead of accessors (o, the heresy). My best guess would be that you often need to refactor you code to include some of the patterns showcased in the repo (factories, for instance). So developers try to future-proof their project by using those patterns everywhere. This is obviously…
So developers try to future-proof their project by using those patterns everywhere.
A better solution is to not be afraid of refactoring (tests help here) so you can solve the problems when they become a problem, not create complication before.
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? Eclipse, Netbeans, Maven, JUnit, JLog J2SE libraries - pretty much all of them Apache libraries Hibernate J2EE libraries The list is endless Even Google App Engine manages to be way more convoluted in Java than in Python or Go, it's not even funny
I use Netbeans[1] and Eclipse all the time, and I don't write Java code like that. Then again, I write GUI's by hand in swing, so .... there is that. [1] edited from Netflix. I use Netflix all the time, too!
Netflix? I think you mean Netbeans maybe =)
I don't write java code like that as well (and I don't use swing) but sometimes is unavoidable due to the ways the libraries are structured.
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#104Please note that GitHub no longer supports Internet Explorer versions 7 or 8. How ironic. This covers so many enterprise programmers with locked down Windows PCs.
Of course, a really industrial-strength FizzBuzz would be in an SVN repo.
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#105I'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…
Dynamic typing is much maligned these days, but it allows you to abstract without nearly so much boilerplate.
Statically typed programs are longer because they contain more information.
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#106I'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…
It all comes down to testability. In statically typed languages like C# and Java, it's very hard to test a class in isolation without abstracting hard links between classes, segregating interfaces, inverting dependencies and so on.
You can write "simple" systems in those languages that have the code purity you're looking for, but they won't be very testable.
In the dynamic languages you mentioned, you have duck typing and testing is a walk in the park.
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#107Can someone tell me why Java seems so to have developed into this kind of chaos? It isn't just enterprise java, has anyone looked at the Apache java projects lately?
Tens of thousands of lines of dependency xml (that often doesn't even work because of incompatible common dependencies), three different built systems (ivy, ant and maven), abstraction for classes that have just a single concrete version, dependencies that are old and no longer supported (I'm looking at you Apache Gora). Hell, find the download link on most Apache java project sites. Now find the one for the source repository.
What madness has infected Java developers?
(Sadly, I've recently had to start doing a bunch of big data work with hadoop, possibly the most fractured and poorly documented open source project ever created)
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#108Just so I never have to answer it again for an interview, I wrote a specification and implementation for FBaaS (FizzBuzz as a Service):
http://github.com/tomjakubowski/fbaas https://github.com/tomjakubowski/fbaas/tree/sinatra
Accepting pull requests! I've had a couple mind-blowing contributions in obscure languages, my favorite being a provably correct Fizzbuzz service written in Coq:
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#109This seems to be implemented in a single programming language without any dependencies on legacy systems. A truly enterprise-grade system talks to PL/SQL stored procedures. Or it would, if the DBAs had written the stored procedures. But they haven't responded to your ticket request yet. And when they do, it will be with a mostly irrelevant question delaying actual work for another week. by which time their manager wi…
At the very least we can have a FizzBuzz table with a FizzBuzz field and the following records:
3
5
Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
Why do JAVA, C# (and the like) IDE's have such complex feature sets? Is it not a reflection of the complexity that those ecosystems require for maintaining your code?
Which feature set? The core of these IDEs is a debugger that is highly integrated with a text editor. Is there a problem with that? IDEs often show me the files that are in the project. Another common (core) feature is code completion. Also, integration with common source control systems. Too complex yet?
You didn't mention XCode. Why not? It has all of those features. So, it must be the non-core feature of IDEs that makes one seem complex and the other not. Which features are you talking about?