Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 171 posts

Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition

#131

Post by GhotiFish »

MattRogish wrote: post #42

I'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…

Then angularJS dropped. Now we see it there as well.

[disclaimer: I am programming a service in angularJS for the client and SpringMVC for the server. My code looks exactly like this. I cry myself to sleep every night.]

Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition

#132

Post by jlgreco »

packetslave wrote: post #119
portlander12345 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, a really industrial-strength FizzBuzz would be in an SVN repo.

Ha! You think any enterprise IT shop is going to trust an open-source product like Subversion with their mission-critical source code? It would be in Perforce or MS Team Foundation Server.

Eh, Perforce is too pleasant if we are really embracing enterprise; makes it too easy to do sensible things like use a git client. No, it has got to be SVN for maximum pain.

Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition

#133

Post by modarts »

jonahss wrote: post #27

It's rather cumbersome that you have to initialize all those factories in FizzBuzz.java. You should probably be using an Inversion of Control system.

But what if you wanted to swap out your IOC container? I think you'd have to inject your container using an InversionOfControlFactory pattern

Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition

#135

Post by skore »

joshrotenberg wrote: post #36
fournm wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is my day job in a nutshell. Somewhere around the 5th folder click I couldn't decide if I wanted to laugh or cry.

Cry. You wanted to cry.

I did cry a little. Hit too close to what is sometimes home[0].

[0] https://plus.google.com/u/0/111011776153281260419/posts/GWdk...

Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition

#136

Post by splawn »

WayneDB wrote: post #110
splawn wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I concede you make a good point. Most of the features you listed I end up using via command line rather than it being integrated directly in my editor. Maybe part of what i see as complexity is just my cheese being moved. However, and correct me if im wrong, IDE's are more popular with "powerhouse" OOP languages in general. I always thought that it was because navigating these types of projects with just a simple text editor was too cumbersome without the editor being aware of context.

Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition

#137

Post by recursive »

metaphorm wrote: post #125
recursive wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Statically typed programs are longer because they contain more information.

they don't contain more information. they contain more explicit declarations of that information. dynamically typed languages leave that information hidden because it is inferrable (or irrelevant).

When the programmer is the one that has to be doing the inference you refer to, there seems to be a good argument that the speed advantage you refer to is only apparent in programs small enough to conceptualize in their entirety.

Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition

#138

Post by serverascode »

Shorel wrote: post #109
raganwald wrote: post #97

This 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

Awesome! :)

Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition

#139

Post by logn »

raganwald wrote: post #97

This 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…

Also it would be nice to configure the strategies with XML. Plus it would be super helpful to have jar plugins for new strategies. And seriously, there's no SOAP interface? This is hardly usable then. Also how the heck am I supposed to build this without Ant and batch and shell scripts to call Ant? Plus once you get ant files you can integrate it with Hudson. And package this as an EAR and add some user authentication too, probably single sign on. Also needs some log4j. And there are probably all sorts of unforeseen bugs and style issues, so it needs Findbugs and Checkstyle integrated.

Re: Fizz Buzz: Enterprise Edition

#140

Post by steveklabnik »

jlgreco wrote: post #132
packetslave wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ha! You think any enterprise IT shop is going to trust an open-source product like Subversion with their mission-critical source code? It would be in Perforce or MS Team Foundation Server.

Eh, Perforce is too pleasant if we are really embracing enterprise; makes it too easy to do sensible things like use a git client. No, it has got to be SVN for maximum pain.

If you think SVN is 'maximum pain' then you haven't tried out the full array of actually bad VCSes. SVN is fine, if a little outdated-feeling.
Post reply on HN