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

Black Triangles (2014)

rampantgames.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–79 of 79 posts

Re: Black Triangles (2014)

#71

Post by JohnBooty »

jiggawatts wrote: post #60
JohnBooty wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

working on these sorts of building blocks for big wins will often actually result in projects and teams getting axed. Had this experience at a previous position. My predecessor had implemented a solution that was extremely hairy, and took many hours to run in production. My manager (a software engineer himself, still involved in day-to-day engineering on this product) said that it couldn't be meaningfully bettered. B…

> said that it couldn't be meaningfully bettered There’s the problem! I’ve had this experience many times — people will internalise their limitations and assume that their best is the best possible. Etc.. When a junior employee just casually proves them wrong, calling the emperor naked, that makes them feel inadequate and even ashamed. I’ve been involved in many similar scenarios. Often there is a history of meetings…

    I’ve had this experience many times — people will
    internalise their limitations and assume that their 
    best is the best possible. Etc..
Man, yeah. I've never found a way to really do this well.

The closest I've come to a winning formula here is to

1. Build a relationship where you have given praise and positive feedback to the individual's other efforts, privately and publicly. To be 100% clear here I'm talking legitimate praise here, not butt-kissing.

2. Find a way for the "victim" to share in your achievement somehow. Help him save face. "Bob and I were looking at ways to optimize the batch job etc etc, and we found a way... etc etc." People who know you and "Bob" will understand who really did the work.

That said, I would say my success at this sort of thing has been pretty low (although I am on a positive winning streak of one positive outcome in a row...)

    He’d accepted the impact on his personal life, after 
    many arguments about his work hours with his wife, etc…
Oh jeez. The... the pathos here is overwhelming.

Re: Black Triangles (2014)

#72

Post by segfaultbuserr »

robbies wrote: post #69
throwaway7679 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It kind of sounds like we're saying opposite things. You're talking about the minimum necessary for just drawing a triangle, as if that's what "hello triangle" means. That's nothing. That's pointless. The construction of hello triangle program marks the end of setup, and the beginning of actual work. Skipping parts because they're boilerplate, or don't directly serve to draw the triangle, defeats the purpose. That's…

(New to comment thread) The article is about setting up all the core infrastructure to start bringing content into the engine, validated by the triangle. Even tho the Vulkan tutorial might seem like work, it’s not actually preparing you to build anything significant on top of it. This just an overview of the API, not much of a building block.

I think both sides have a point, it's just a matter of perspective. One person's "drawing a black triangle" can be another's "black triangle moment". It's turtles all the way down.

From the perspective of an experienced Vulkan programmer, it's only a basic tutorial on creating an empty stub project, which is useless in itself as the real work of creating a powerful 3D engine has yet to start. But from the perspective of a new graphics programmer without any prior Vulkan knowledge, creating a stub project capable of drawing a triangle is already an accomplishment in itself. In OpenGL, the same thing is possible in 50 lines of code, compared to a stub Vulkan project that explicitly defines every component using thousands lines of code. Upon finishing it, one would finally have an understanding of how every part comes together, which enables further development. It would be then possible to draw many different kinds of object on top of this stub framework. In this sense, it fits the definition of:

> accomplishments that take a lot of effort to achieve, but upon completion you don’t have much to show for it only that more work can now proceed.

Re: Black Triangles (2014)

#73

Post by jiggawatts »

JohnBooty wrote: post #71
jiggawatts wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> said that it couldn't be meaningfully bettered There’s the problem! I’ve had this experience many times — people will internalise their limitations and assume that their best is the best possible. Etc.. When a junior employee just casually proves them wrong, calling the emperor naked, that makes them feel inadequate and even ashamed. I’ve been involved in many similar scenarios. Often there is a history of meetings…

I’ve had this experience many times — people will internalise their limitations and assume that their best is the best possible. Etc.. Man, yeah. I've never found a way to really do this well. The closest I've come to a winning formula here is to 1. Build a relationship where you have given praise and positive feedback to the individual's other efforts, privately and publicly. To be 100% clear here I'm talking legiti…

Generally I've found that there is no easy way to call someone's baby ugly. Sometimes it is best to just say it outright, other times you have to skirt around the issue, or just let them come to the conclusion themselves when you demonstrate a fix to an "unrelated" issue that just so happens to be relevant to their problem.

> Oh jeez. The... the pathos here is overwhelming.

A landmine I've stepped on multiple times is that this type of scenario is sometimes not tragic, but actually a form of soft corruption: after hours work gets overtime pay! "Fixing" these issues can cut into people's salaries very significantly, perhaps reducing their pay to less than half. They're obviously going to fight you every step of the way, without ever saying the real reason for why they're really opposed to your helpful suggestions.

Re: Black Triangles (2014)

#74

Post by jacquesm »

ianbutler wrote: post #29
jacquesm wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like such projects. They're the programming equivalent of making jewelry. Is your code public?

Thanks for your interest! It was definitely rewarding though I’m sure I can optimize a few things still. The code is public: https://github.com/iantbutler01/dart

So, I had a look at it, very nice and tight code, relatively easy to follow even for someone who doesn't really know rust (I think I picked up more rust from your code than I did from any other source about rust).

I especially like the very clean and simple interface that abstracts away all of the complexity underneath.

Thank you for putting this out there, rust needs more projects like this, quiet and effective, showing rather than telling.

Re: Black Triangles (2014)

#75

Post by JohnBooty »

jiggawatts wrote: post #73
JohnBooty wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve had this experience many times — people will internalise their limitations and assume that their best is the best possible. Etc.. Man, yeah. I've never found a way to really do this well. The closest I've come to a winning formula here is to 1. Build a relationship where you have given praise and positive feedback to the individual's other efforts, privately and publicly. To be 100% clear here I'm talking legiti…

Generally I've found that there is no easy way to call someone's baby ugly. Sometimes it is best to just say it outright, other times you have to skirt around the issue, or just let them come to the conclusion themselves when you demonstrate a fix to an "unrelated" issue that just so happens to be relevant to their problem. > Oh jeez. The... the pathos here is overwhelming. A landmine I've stepped on multiple times i…

Oh geez, that unhappy guy was getting OT pay? yeah that explains a lot!!

Great points all around

Re: Black Triangles (2014)

#76

Post by robbies »

segfaultbuserr wrote: post #72
robbies wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(New to comment thread) The article is about setting up all the core infrastructure to start bringing content into the engine, validated by the triangle. Even tho the Vulkan tutorial might seem like work, it’s not actually preparing you to build anything significant on top of it. This just an overview of the API, not much of a building block.

I think both sides have a point, it's just a matter of perspective. One person's "drawing a black triangle" can be another's "black triangle moment". It's turtles all the way down. From the perspective of an experienced Vulkan programmer, it's only a basic tutorial on creating an empty stub project, which is useless in itself as the real work of creating a powerful 3D engine has yet to start. But from the perspective…

I appreciate this perspective, good points, thanks

Re: Black Triangles (2014)

#77

Post by ianbutler »

jacquesm wrote: post #74
ianbutler wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for your interest! It was definitely rewarding though I’m sure I can optimize a few things still. The code is public: https://github.com/iantbutler01/dart

So, I had a look at it, very nice and tight code, relatively easy to follow even for someone who doesn't really know rust (I think I picked up more rust from your code than I did from any other source about rust). I especially like the very clean and simple interface that abstracts away all of the complexity underneath. Thank you for putting this out there, rust needs more projects like this, quiet and effective, sho…

Thank you so much! :)

Re: Black Triangles (2014)

#78

Post by therealcamino »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #32
therealcamino wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody owns it, obviously. It can be helpful however to be aware of the associations your terminology already has. From a practical perspective, it interferes with getting your point across to overload a symbol that already has strong associations. From a social perspective, it's considerate not to use symbols that have strong negative associations for others (which is not a view shared by the "fuck your feelings" cr…

On the other hand, if you go into history deep enough you'll find symbolism for any and everything being a hate symbol. The okay hand emoji Of all things had a controversy so nothing is safe. Triangles are the most basic shape available so you'll find any and all kinds of symbols to represent good and bad things. I don't think it's very productive to worry about how it was used 70 years ago unless you're talking to a…

It was used during the 80s.

Like I said, I'm not telling anyone what to do. Everyone can feel free to call anything whatever they want, to use or reuse symbols as they see fit. The signifier is not the signified.

Just wanted people to know. Because like I said, if your goal is to communicate, you might want to know if you're using something that has another, emotionally-loaded interpretation.

Re: Black Triangles (2014)

#79

Post by johnnyanmac »

therealcamino wrote: post #78
johnnyanmac wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, if you go into history deep enough you'll find symbolism for any and everything being a hate symbol. The okay hand emoji Of all things had a controversy so nothing is safe. Triangles are the most basic shape available so you'll find any and all kinds of symbols to represent good and bad things. I don't think it's very productive to worry about how it was used 70 years ago unless you're talking to a…

It was used during the 80s. Like I said, I'm not telling anyone what to do. Everyone can feel free to call anything whatever they want, to use or reuse symbols as they see fit. The signifier is not the signified. Just wanted people to know. Because like I said, if your goal is to communicate, you might want to know if you're using something that has another, emotionally-loaded interpretation.

I'll keep it in mind, but this feels more like a case-by-case basis than something to be avoid at all costs (which was the tone of your original comment). We are 80 years out from WW2 so the only people who would really understand such a reference are the dying Silent Generation and neonazis/anti-neonazi cirlces (a circle of discussion I already avoid for the sake of my own sanity).
Post reply on HN