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

I hate compilers

xeiaso.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 182 posts

Re: I hate compilers

#61

Post by embedding-shape »

jstimpfle wrote: post #41
jdw64 wrote: post #16

Reading this, I think low level engineering is actually more dependent on specific environments. Hardware also has its own points of change. Usually, when you think at a high level, environmental changes are less significant than you might expect. But low level thinking tends to be tied to specific environments, which is what makes it difficult. The reason low level is hard is that even if the code itself is short, t…

Depends on what you mean by low level I guess. Compared to web application framework churn rate, simple procedural programming without many dependencies is remarkably stable. You tend to program in a way that works for most platforms (all targetted platforms). How to best do that you learn over the years. To me personally it's very refreshing if the environment around you does not constantly change. That affords lear…

> You tend to program in a way that works for most platforms (all targetted platforms).

Isn't that true for web frameworks too? Usually they'll only target unix, but if they target windows and macos, then they work on those platforms too? Or am I misunderstanding what you're trying to say here?

Re: I hate compilers

#62

Post by jstimpfle »

embedding-shape wrote: post #61
jstimpfle wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on what you mean by low level I guess. Compared to web application framework churn rate, simple procedural programming without many dependencies is remarkably stable. You tend to program in a way that works for most platforms (all targetted platforms). How to best do that you learn over the years. To me personally it's very refreshing if the environment around you does not constantly change. That affords lear…

> You tend to program in a way that works for most platforms (all targetted platforms). Isn't that true for web frameworks too? Usually they'll only target unix, but if they target windows and macos, then they work on those platforms too? Or am I misunderstanding what you're trying to say here?

This is how I mean it: In case of low level programming, the "platform" is the hardware/OS/compiler. In case of web programming, the "platform" is the web framework.

If you update the OS, hardware, or compiler, you will see only few changes. If you update the web framework, you may see breakages, API deprecations or whatever. You may want to move to a different web framework entirely. TBH I don't really know, I don't know web programming beyond basic HTML/Javascript. That's what they say, though.

Re: I hate compilers

#63

Post by embedding-shape »

jstimpfle wrote: post #62
embedding-shape wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You tend to program in a way that works for most platforms (all targetted platforms). Isn't that true for web frameworks too? Usually they'll only target unix, but if they target windows and macos, then they work on those platforms too? Or am I misunderstanding what you're trying to say here?

This is how I mean it: In case of low level programming, the "platform" is the hardware/OS/compiler. In case of web programming, the "platform" is the web framework. If you update the OS, hardware, or compiler, you will see only few changes. If you update the web framework, you may see breakages, API deprecations or whatever. You may want to move to a different web framework entirely. TBH I don't really know, I don't…

Well I mean you're comparing two different solutions at different layers here.

In the case of an desktop application, unless you build things against OS libraries, your "platform" is also typically a framework, like QT or AppKit or whatever you end up using. That's the equivalent of the "web framework" in the web world.

Basically, it goes "Your app > GUI framework > other/OS libraries" for desktop apps, "Your app > web framework > other/OS libraries" for web applications.

Then in both approaches you can of course skip the framework if you want, no one is forcing you to use those in either of the cases.

Edit: I realize now we might be talking past each other, I was under the understanding that "web framework" is about backend web frameworks, but maybe you actually meant frontend frameworks running client-side. If so, replace "other/OS libraries" with "browser runtime" and my comment more or less still makes sense :)

Re: I hate compilers

#64

Post by AnimalMuppet »

jstimpfle wrote: post #62
embedding-shape wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You tend to program in a way that works for most platforms (all targetted platforms). Isn't that true for web frameworks too? Usually they'll only target unix, but if they target windows and macos, then they work on those platforms too? Or am I misunderstanding what you're trying to say here?

This is how I mean it: In case of low level programming, the "platform" is the hardware/OS/compiler. In case of web programming, the "platform" is the web framework. If you update the OS, hardware, or compiler, you will see only few changes. If you update the web framework, you may see breakages, API deprecations or whatever. You may want to move to a different web framework entirely. TBH I don't really know, I don't…

More: If you upgrade the hardware or the compiler, you upgrade them. If you're doing web programming, you have to worry about the user upgrading their browser.

Re: I hate compilers

#66

Post by tengwar2 »

Animats wrote: post #47

I hate proof of work code running on my machine for the benefit of someone else. It's like planting a crypto miner.

Yup, and I suspect that even if OP is honest in this respect, if proof-of-work gets established as a normal practice for web pages, it's going to be used this way.

But just taking this as-is, what is the environmental impact likely to be when multiplied up by the number of users? Proof of work is a bad idea.

Re: I hate compilers

#67

Post by jstimpfle »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #64
jstimpfle wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is how I mean it: In case of low level programming, the "platform" is the hardware/OS/compiler. In case of web programming, the "platform" is the web framework. If you update the OS, hardware, or compiler, you will see only few changes. If you update the web framework, you may see breakages, API deprecations or whatever. You may want to move to a different web framework entirely. TBH I don't really know, I don't…

More: If you upgrade the hardware or the compiler, you upgrade them. If you're doing web programming, you have to worry about the user upgrading their browser.

It's not so much about the browser (I'm not aware of major incompatibilities introduced by new browsers or new W3C standards). But the software ecosytems (like frameworks, or node.js) that web people are relying on in order to create their web apps.

Re: I hate compilers

#68

Post by mplanchard »

crvdgc wrote: post #32

Nix also needs the build output to be deterministic to calculate the hash. It also has the problems of timestamps etc. The build environment tries to be hermetic by setting the time to be epoch among other things.

Yes, reading this I was thinking about how many of these problems go away with a nix environment. Certainly not all of them, but it’s a great way to get a reproducible build environment that includes direct specification of system dependencies.

Re: I hate compilers

#69

Post by jstimpfle »

embedding-shape wrote: post #63
jstimpfle wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is how I mean it: In case of low level programming, the "platform" is the hardware/OS/compiler. In case of web programming, the "platform" is the web framework. If you update the OS, hardware, or compiler, you will see only few changes. If you update the web framework, you may see breakages, API deprecations or whatever. You may want to move to a different web framework entirely. TBH I don't really know, I don't…

Well I mean you're comparing two different solutions at different layers here. In the case of an desktop application, unless you build things against OS libraries, your "platform" is also typically a framework, like QT or AppKit or whatever you end up using. That's the equivalent of the "web framework" in the web world. Basically, it goes "Your app > GUI framework > other/OS libraries" for desktop apps, "Your app > w…

> your "platform" is also typically a framework, like QT or AppKit or whatever you end up using

That's not what I consider "low level programming". I don't use any of these.

Yes you can do try and do plain Javascript. Honestly Javascript is a much less pleasurable environment than a compiled statically typed procedural language. The main advantage of the browser is you get a viewport, you get font rendering etc. with almost no setup required at all.

Post reply on HN