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

Talks that changed the way I think about programming

opowell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 103 posts

Re: Talks that changed the way I think about programming

#51

Post by jpt4 »

pjc50 wrote: post #14

The theological second half of this is bizarre - I've never heard of this being considered a "problem", heaven (in the Christian tradition) is not a hall of fame that one nominates figures for. And the Mormon tradition of proxy-baptising people who are dead and never showed any sign of adherence to their tenets is highly questionable.

In the particular case of Socrates, one might speculate that he had the privilege of affirming or denying his faith before Christ himself: http://biblehub.com/1_peter/3-19.htm

Re: Talks that changed the way I think about programming

#52

Post by gens »

tchow wrote: post #38

He mentioned a lie of: Code should be designed around a model of the world but I didn't hear any reason why not to? The Key/Value pair being the only reason, but besides that being a optimization / preoptimization in high performance applications, is there any reason to not design code around a model of the world? Seems to me it makes things easier to think about.

If i'm not misunderstanding you.. (as i didn't watch most of the videos there)

See data-oriented programming (not to be confused with data-driven). In the end code just processes data.

Re: Talks that changed the way I think about programming

#53

Post by irrationalfab »

thristian wrote: post #26

I suspect a lot of these video are the most powerful when you encounter them at exactly the time you happen to be wrestling with those same ideas yourself. Every time I design software, I'm think back to Gary Bernhardt's "Boundaries" talk¹ and his practical, concrete suggestions for writing testable code. But I've never met anybody else who seemed as impressed as I was by the idea. ¹: https://www.destroyallsoftware.c…

I consider that talk one of the most interesting about programming and I consider it underrated as well.

Re: Talks that changed the way I think about programming

#54

Post by irrationalfab »

thristian wrote: post #26

I suspect a lot of these video are the most powerful when you encounter them at exactly the time you happen to be wrestling with those same ideas yourself. Every time I design software, I'm think back to Gary Bernhardt's "Boundaries" talk¹ and his practical, concrete suggestions for writing testable code. But I've never met anybody else who seemed as impressed as I was by the idea. ¹: https://www.destroyallsoftware.c…

I consider that talk one of the most interesting about programming and I consider it underrated as well.

Re: Talks that changed the way I think about programming

#57

Post by strictfp »

maxaf wrote: post #39
JOURNEYSA wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We used this mess of a library, which provides no clear interface and corrupts data https://github.com/johnbywater/eventsourcing

A faulty implementation doesn't necessarily invalidate the idea. I also strongly suggest looking into statically typed languages. Python is very poorly suited to working with data.

Yes, but even so it's a huge undertaking to build your own event sourcing. Many get burnt.

Re: Talks that changed the way I think about programming

#58

Post by [deleted] »

maxaf wrote: post #39
JOURNEYSA wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We used this mess of a library, which provides no clear interface and corrupts data https://github.com/johnbywater/eventsourcing

A faulty implementation doesn't necessarily invalidate the idea. I also strongly suggest looking into statically typed languages. Python is very poorly suited to working with data.

[deleted]

Re: Talks that changed the way I think about programming

#59

Post by wheaties »

SonicSoul wrote: post #56

tried listening to why OOP is bad and it was painful. 10 minutes in and 0 insights. He kept saying things like "encapsulation doesn't work" and then moving on. Not willing to stay another 20 min to find out why.

There are many talks about why OOP is "bad" but they tend to come from the FP camp The decent talks of this nature are backed up by firm, fundamental reasoning showcasing the power of "better" abstractions. I, personally, find both OOP and FP compelling, depending on what I'm trying to model.

Wish I could link a few examples, sorry.

Re: Talks that changed the way I think about programming

#60

Post by Fuzzy_Logic »

pjc50 wrote: post #14

The theological second half of this is bizarre - I've never heard of this being considered a "problem", heaven (in the Christian tradition) is not a hall of fame that one nominates figures for. And the Mormon tradition of proxy-baptising people who are dead and never showed any sign of adherence to their tenets is highly questionable.

Mormon and long time lurker here. Just wanted to give clarity to this because it can be confusing. Mormons don't believe they are forcibly baptizing these people by proxy. They believe that everyone should have the opportunity to accept baptism and salvation through Jesus Christ, even if they did not receive the opportunity in the mortal stage of life: "Individuals can then choose to accept or reject what has been done in their behalf."

https://www.lds.org/topics/baptisms-for-the-dead?lang=eng

Post reply on HN