11–20 of 69 posts
It's interesting. 12 years have passed, and I still prefer a native (not Electron) desktop app to its web equivalent for practically any task, from writing code to working with spreadsheets to PCB design. Even for such a basic task like word processing I prefer to use a local program rather than a web app.
I never get why CRUD work is looked down upon by many on this site amongst others. Most applications are a variation on CRUD. A well done CRUD app should be pretty simple, but simplicity is not something that our industry encourages, the interview process often selects for the ability to produce complexity. As a result most CRUD apps (certainly the ones I have inherited) are an over engineered mess.
But that's boring. I'm a software developer, I want to write code. If my code is too easy, if it's just what it's supposed to do, where's the challenge? I know, let's use a difficult language! I know, I'll take this chunk, this is now mine, I call it a microservice and it's my baby. An overview of the whole architecture? Pfft that's boring. Netflix does it like this, look they have over a hundred microservices, clearly they must be doing something right, right?
A much less hostile statement that is easier to defend would be "All Programming is Network Programming" - could do an interesting syntax comparison based on what kind of network is in question, but I guess people do that all the time with "monads in other programming languages (than haskell)" kind of posts.
Huh, if the C guys were laughed at by the assemblies, the pythonistas by the C guys, I can't wait until the day that something emerges that Starbucks-chugging hipster 'React code-artisans' will be able to laugh at. "Oh, you think you could adequately program a neural interface using Scratch? How quaint "
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's wrong with JS syntax? Seems pretty modern and adequate for what it needs to do
Maybe what it needed to do, but not what people do with it now. There are entirely “enterprise” systems coded in that thing. It’s an human problem, original JS syntax was fine imho.
Everything else is worse because you are forced to use this single technology stack that the browser offers you. And people are trying to break free of those limitations, WebAssembly, WebUSB, or doing their own rendering into a canvas instead of having a DOM. One size fits all was, is, and will never be true. Are there certain applications that benefit from being web applications? Sure. But is this a panacea? Certainly not.
At some point you browser will just turn into another operating system running on top of your operating system. The success of the current situation is, I think, mostly due to the fact that the web browser was a universally adopted least common denominator for running arbitrary code. You could get all the benefits of web applications without the browser, you could have platform independent binaries, you could download them on demand, you could sandbox them. But you probably would have a hard time to invent those standards and get them universally adopted by all platforms and operating systems.
Huh, if the C guys were laughed at by the assemblies, the pythonistas by the C guys, I can't wait until the day that something emerges that Starbucks-chugging hipster 'React code-artisans' will be able to laugh at. "Oh, you think you could adequately program a neural interface using Scratch? How quaint "
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27486041
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27450431
It doesn’t matter because such comparisons are bullshit posturing by people who are insecurely qualifying their ignorance of how their beloved tools work.
It's interesting. 12 years have passed, and I still prefer a native (not Electron) desktop app to its web equivalent for practically any task, from writing code to working with spreadsheets to PCB design. Even for such a basic task like word processing I prefer to use a local program rather than a web app.
I never get why CRUD work is looked down upon by many on this site amongst others. Most applications are a variation on CRUD. A well done CRUD app should be pretty simple, but simplicity is not something that our industry encourages, the interview process often selects for the ability to produce complexity. As a result most CRUD apps (certainly the ones I have inherited) are an over engineered mess.
It's because people get bored. With CRUD apps, the challenge is (should be) in the domain, wrangling that into a comprehensible shape. The various layers and code should be boring - input, validation, API, business logic, persistence. It's the kinda thing that can already be built using visual programming tools, drag and drop interfaces or a single config file churning out a fully functional CRUD API with all bells a…
I am a software engineer. My job is to solve problems, not to "write code". It just happens that most of the solutions will involve code. The less code that can be written to solve a problem the better. More code is a liability not an asset.