121–130 of 291 posts
Object-Oriented Programming: "Luckily the industry doesn’t really use this term any more" Wait really? What world are they living in? Am I just out of touch or something?
OOP is still very alive and well, mainly because an aweful lot of the most widespread languages are OOP, how can you talk about java and python without using OOP ?
I was expecting "master" and "slave" to show up since I've seen that argument being made ( https://www.eetimes.com/its-time-for-ieee-to-retire-master-s... ), but I have a hard time taking it seriously. I agree about AI though. The rush to exploit the phrase as a marketing term has killed it's original meaning. Once we actually have AI we're going to need something else to call it. I've always kind of liked the distin…
You mean Artificial General Intelligence? ;)
On a more serious note, it is a shame that we ended up calling it AI instead of something innocuous like "pattern matching code". There's so much bullshit and misunderstanding that wouldn't be there if we had named it something less impressive
Oh man, I wish most of this would go away. RE: Agile 'We have to find a new way to discuss the idea that maybe we focus on the working software and not on the organisational bureaucracy, and that way does not involve the word…' Which is rather hilarious, because the only people I ever hear use the word agile are the beaurocrats. RE: DevOps, I still don't know what it actually means. When I first heard the term, it wa…
DevOps has in my experience become full stack + server maintenance + misc tool development.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except it doesn't. It's a one-sided and misleading concept. The problem is usually finding a balance between "Let's hack some suicidally awful crap together quickly to see if we even have a market and then fix it when we have real income, except everyone knows we won't so it will be a permanent drag on the business" and "Let's build a beautiful extendable maintainable paragon of elegance and purity and ignore the fac…
It's not one-sided though. Debt is often a very useful tool. You take on debt now because you can do more productive things with the money that will be worth more than the payments you have to make on it later. This is an extremely apt description of technical debt. Often times people will make bad decisions about what debt to take on, and the same is true for technical debt, and often times people will overestimate…
For companies, whether to use debt or equity to finance their balance sheet is just a technical decision. Either way, you have to pay the cost of capital.
(Ie even if you finance your project from equity and not from debt, it still has to be better for your shareholders than just giving them the necessary capital back via a stock buyback.)
A company can have debt as a permanent feature of its balance sheet, just like equity.
Funny enough, I suspect from a corporate finance point of view, technical debt should actually be called 'technical equity', because technical debt only gets expensive when your project takes off. If you never end up using that piece of code, the technical debt never has to be paid. But it gets more and more expensive, the more successful your project is.
Just like selling 50% of your startup to an investor (as equity) gets more and more expensive (in retrospect), only if your startup really takes off. Debt stays the same price, whether your startup is middling or goes to the moon.
Strong disagree on "technical debt" Rather, the entire world is built on it and there's some level of acceptance required, but we definitely need a shorthand phrase for "we're doing something stupid that will save us time now and make us hate ourselves a year from now" Edit: thinking on it, also "devops". It's really job title for "sysadmin but paid and owned by the software department to keep ITs fingers out of ever…
The problem with tech dept is that it instills some kind of linearity -- you can pay it off whenever. Often times "tech dept" comes from the fact that we do not truly know what to build. Hence we use the simplest measure to satisfy what requirements there are. Call it the "Occam's razor of software development".
Oh man, I wish most of this would go away. RE: Agile 'We have to find a new way to discuss the idea that maybe we focus on the working software and not on the organisational bureaucracy, and that way does not involve the word…' Which is rather hilarious, because the only people I ever hear use the word agile are the beaurocrats. RE: DevOps, I still don't know what it actually means. When I first heard the term, it wa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Genuine question. Why bother downvoting, and not just move along? Perhaps there should be a button for 'disagree strongly'.
Those are polar opposites. A button for 'disagree strongly' should upvote a comment. When Einstein and Niels Bohr 'strongly disagree' on quantum physics in 1927, they start a debate that makes both of them more enlightened. When a bullshit artist, who couldn't care less about the truth, hijack a discussion to make it all about Him (it's almost always a dude), everyone become dumber. "Moving along" is not enough becau…
(I am sure people have tried it before..)
- OOP 'modules, but using the word class'
- Agile 'It used to mean “not waterfall” and now means “waterfall with a status meeting every day and an internal demo every two weeks'
- AI 'an algorithm pushed to production by a programmer who doesn’t understand it'
Strong disagree on "technical debt" Rather, the entire world is built on it and there's some level of acceptance required, but we definitely need a shorthand phrase for "we're doing something stupid that will save us time now and make us hate ourselves a year from now" Edit: thinking on it, also "devops". It's really job title for "sysadmin but paid and owned by the software department to keep ITs fingers out of ever…
It's uncomfortable to say, "In retrospect that was an unfortunate, unnecessary, and shortsighted choice that didn't really save any justifiable amount of time or money", so instead people say, "We've accumulated some technical debt" to cover up mistakes instead of acknowledging and learning from them.