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

Show HN: Code Words, a quarterly publication about programming

codewords.hackerschool.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 78 posts

Re: Show HN: Code Words, a quarterly publication about programming

#41

Post by blergh123 »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #10
blubbi2 wrote: post #5

(commenting on one of the articles) Wow. Just stumbled upon the following quote and read the corresponding article. > Programming language comparisons usually focus on the brevity and expressiveness of the language. If the solution to a programming problem has fewer lines and is “easier to understand” or “clearer” in one language than another, that is an argument for using the former over the latter. This comparison…

> - https://codewords.hackerschool.com/issues/one/why-are-object... . > In all seriousness, this is one of the best articles I've ever read. I couldn't agree more with the author. I'm not sure if you are being serious (you say you are, so Po's law), but this is a bad article written by someone who I guess must be a novice who thinks he knows something now but will look back on this 5 years later and cringe; examples.…

This kind of nasty reply puts me off writing blog entries, and really turns me off the industry as a whole.

I am so disappointed, it's possible to be constructively critical; the snide remarks like 'I can't stop myself from laughing' are pretty unnecessary.

This makes me want to walk away from this industry. How about a bit of maturity and sensitivity, or in layman's terms - don't be an asshole.

Re: Show HN: Code Words, a quarterly publication about programming

#42

Post by rntz »

rdc12 wrote: post #40

From the article Option and null in dynamic languages [1] "Languages and libraries are defined not by what they make possible (the Church-Turing thesis tells us that), but by what they make easy." The Church-Turing thesis tells us about what is fundamentally computable, what a library decides to implement is not the same thing. Libraries are not about what is fundamentally computable, but about abstracting away the m…

I can't tell whether you intend to agree or disagree with the quote. Your tone suggests you are disagreeing, but your content to me seems to be in agreement.

(I am the article author.)

Re: Show HN: Code Words, a quarterly publication about programming

#43

Post by dorian-graph »

davidbalbert wrote: post #24
beefsack wrote: post #8

Typo in the functional programming article (which was a great read): > Every time a person reads afor loop

Fixed. Thanks!

Another typo in the same article:

> race() recurses3 with the result of run_step_of_race().

Edit: Finished reading the article. Brilliant. Even the footnotes were better explanations than commonly found.

Re: Show HN: Code Words, a quarterly publication about programming

#44

Post by [deleted] »

blergh123 wrote: post #41
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - https://codewords.hackerschool.com/issues/one/why-are-object... . > In all seriousness, this is one of the best articles I've ever read. I couldn't agree more with the author. I'm not sure if you are being serious (you say you are, so Po's law), but this is a bad article written by someone who I guess must be a novice who thinks he knows something now but will look back on this 5 years later and cringe; examples.…

This kind of nasty reply puts me off writing blog entries, and really turns me off the industry as a whole. I am so disappointed, it's possible to be constructively critical; the snide remarks like 'I can't stop myself from laughing' are pretty unnecessary. This makes me want to walk away from this industry. How about a bit of maturity and sensitivity, or in layman's terms - don't be an asshole.

[deleted]

Re: Show HN: Code Words, a quarterly publication about programming

#45

Post by bshimmin »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #32
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - https://codewords.hackerschool.com/issues/one/why-are-object... . > In all seriousness, this is one of the best articles I've ever read. I couldn't agree more with the author. I'm not sure if you are being serious (you say you are, so Po's law), but this is a bad article written by someone who I guess must be a novice who thinks he knows something now but will look back on this 5 years later and cringe; examples.…

Global variables are terribad (imo). Dependency injection is good (imo). I don't think the article is particular clear with everything it's trying to say, but those two points seem pretty reasonable, no?

I looked up "terribad", since it seemed an unlikely typo. The luminaries at Urban Dictionary told me it was "[t]he act of being terrible and bad at the same time"; I can't for the life of me see how something could be terrible and not also be bad.

Re: Show HN: Code Words, a quarterly publication about programming

#47

Post by paublyrne »

bshimmin wrote: post #45
forrestthewoods wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Global variables are terribad (imo). Dependency injection is good (imo). I don't think the article is particular clear with everything it's trying to say, but those two points seem pretty reasonable, no?

I looked up "terribad", since it seemed an unlikely typo. The luminaries at Urban Dictionary told me it was "[t]he act of being terrible and bad at the same time"; I can't for the life of me see how something could be terrible and not also be bad.

Perhaps it mean bad as in not deserving of much praise, and terrible as in malevolent.

Such a word might be a good description of, say, reality television.

Re: Show HN: Code Words, a quarterly publication about programming

#48

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

davidbalbert wrote: post #19
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - https://codewords.hackerschool.com/issues/one/why-are-object... . > In all seriousness, this is one of the best articles I've ever read. I couldn't agree more with the author. I'm not sure if you are being serious (you say you are, so Po's law), but this is a bad article written by someone who I guess must be a novice who thinks he knows something now but will look back on this 5 years later and cringe; examples.…

One thing I think we could have done better with Code Words is added short bios. Bios add context, which is lacking here. Here's R0ml's bio from 2006[^1]: r0ml is an software architect and systems designer with over thirty years of experience. For two decades, r0ml worked on Wall Street, developing market data, trading, risk management, and quantitative analysis systems. More recently, as chief technical architect at…

"""don't use libraries, write things from scratch, the expressive power of a language is partially derived from what's in its standard library)."""

One of these things is not like the others.

He sounds like he's very charismatic and personal, and probably an ok dude to be around, but that still does not change the fact that this was a big mess of an article.

Re: Show HN: Code Words, a quarterly publication about programming

#49

Post by LukeB42 »

rdc12 wrote: post #40

From the article Option and null in dynamic languages [1] "Languages and libraries are defined not by what they make possible (the Church-Turing thesis tells us that), but by what they make easy." The Church-Turing thesis tells us about what is fundamentally computable, what a library decides to implement is not the same thing. Libraries are not about what is fundamentally computable, but about abstracting away the m…

It's almost as if you could say languages and libraries are defined by what they make easy..

Re: Show HN: Code Words, a quarterly publication about programming

#50

Post by krick »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #10
blubbi2 wrote: post #5

(commenting on one of the articles) Wow. Just stumbled upon the following quote and read the corresponding article. > Programming language comparisons usually focus on the brevity and expressiveness of the language. If the solution to a programming problem has fewer lines and is “easier to understand” or “clearer” in one language than another, that is an argument for using the former over the latter. This comparison…

> - https://codewords.hackerschool.com/issues/one/why-are-object... . > In all seriousness, this is one of the best articles I've ever read. I couldn't agree more with the author. I'm not sure if you are being serious (you say you are, so Po's law), but this is a bad article written by someone who I guess must be a novice who thinks he knows something now but will look back on this 5 years later and cringe; examples.…

> imperative (or functional) programming

Indeed, this is enough to stop reading. Implying that two pretty much opposite concepts are one and the same thing — especially when comparing them to OOP, which, basically, is one kind of imperative programming already means that author clearly doesn't know what he's talking about.

So I don't know and I don't care who this guy is, how much "experience" he allegedly has and there's no justification to the fact that every second comment in the thread tries to apply to authority as if it means something. All we need to know about the article is article itself, and this article is full of nonsense.

That being said, I actually agree with conclusions (though these are pretty obvious things anybody with handful of experience would see). But the whole reasoning behind it is just… hilarious.

Post reply on HN