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

Didn't see this coming: The Goldman Sachs Github Account

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 115 posts

Re: Didn't see this coming: The Goldman Sachs Github Account

#81

Post by eliasmacpherson »

jrockway wrote: post #70
bradleyjg wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very best chess teams consist of a computers and a humans cooperating with each. The computer insures perfect tactically play while the human concentrates on overall strategy. Why should programming be any different? The very best IDEs in the hands of a skilled programmer should produce code better than a similarly skilled programmer who insists on using a dumb text editor. If the resulting code can only effectiv…

I made a vow to myself to never reply to a comment that used both "tactics" and "strategy" in the same sentence, but here goes... Why should programming be any different? The very best IDEs in the hands of a skilled programmer should produce code better than a similarly skilled programmer who insists on using a dumb text editor. If the resulting code can only effectively be modified by a similar computer/human team -…

The speed and manner in which the full version of Visual Studio allows you to debug container objects and jump JIT to the code currently executing to look at the call stack and inspect variable values, is not superficial. As a text editor, code writing tool, sure it's not much better than a standard editor. As an IDE with a debugger it allows an experienced developer to debug faster and write better code more quickly. Even experienced developers have to debug their code, and it is time consuming even for them.

Eclipse is not Visual Studio though I've heard good things about IntelliJ IDEA.

Re: Didn't see this coming: The Goldman Sachs Github Account

#82

Post by rmc »

mkopinsky wrote: post #49
sliverstorm wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe GPLv2 has a clause against kicking puppies

Douglas Crockford puts an anti-puppy-kicking clause in his OS licenses. www.json.org/license.html

That sort of licence is not "Open Source" nor "Free Software", since it does not allow Freedom 0 (the freedom to run the programme for any reason) nor OSD № 6 "No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor". (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html and http://www.opensource.org/osd.html)

It might be nice to have a chuckle about "do no evil" in a copyright licence, but that's a massive loophole that the original author could use to stop almost anyone from using their software.

Re: Didn't see this coming: The Goldman Sachs Github Account

#83

Post by gaius »

lordmatty wrote: post #74

I can understand the reaction on this community to the news, and I'm sure that there are elements of PR and recruitment strategy here, but I happen to know that the primary driver is pretty sound; job satisfaction for top employees. Goldmans has its share of top programmers and, like any company, is keen to retain them. One of these people made contributing to Open Source a major goal for last year. Well done to him,…

When I interviewed at GS last year, I was explicitly told that I would not be able to go on working on open source (they had checked out both my blog and my Github). This despite none of the technologies in my main project being in use in the group I was interviewing with...

Re: Didn't see this coming: The Goldman Sachs Github Account

#84

Post by lordmatty »

gaius wrote: post #83
lordmatty wrote: post #74

I can understand the reaction on this community to the news, and I'm sure that there are elements of PR and recruitment strategy here, but I happen to know that the primary driver is pretty sound; job satisfaction for top employees. Goldmans has its share of top programmers and, like any company, is keen to retain them. One of these people made contributing to Open Source a major goal for last year. Well done to him,…

When I interviewed at GS last year, I was explicitly told that I would not be able to go on working on open source (they had checked out both my blog and my Github). This despite none of the technologies in my main project being in use in the group I was interviewing with...

I guess it probably depends on the position/team. I wouldn't expect GS to open source anything they consider a competitive advantage, but then I don't see Google open sourcing their search algos either :-)

Re: Didn't see this coming: The Goldman Sachs Github Account

#85

Post by corin_ »

lordmatty wrote: post #84
gaius wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I interviewed at GS last year, I was explicitly told that I would not be able to go on working on open source (they had checked out both my blog and my Github). This despite none of the technologies in my main project being in use in the group I was interviewing with...

I guess it probably depends on the position/team. I wouldn't expect GS to open source anything they consider a competitive advantage, but then I don't see Google open sourcing their search algos either :-)

There's a difference between "you can't open source some/all of our code" and "you can't work on unrelated open source projects in your free time".

Re: Didn't see this coming: The Goldman Sachs Github Account

#86

Post by FuzzyDunlop »

irahul wrote: post #78
bradleyjg wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very best chess teams consist of a computers and a humans cooperating with each. The computer insures perfect tactically play while the human concentrates on overall strategy. Why should programming be any different? The very best IDEs in the hands of a skilled programmer should produce code better than a similarly skilled programmer who insists on using a dumb text editor. If the resulting code can only effectiv…

> The very best IDEs in the hands of a skilled programmer should produce code better than a similarly skilled programmer who insists on using a dumb text editor. The very best IDEs produce code at the skill level of dumbest programmers - generating getter-setter, or importing, or wrapping something in try-catch...From the top of my head, I can't think of a single instance where the code produced by IDE can be conside…

When I think about this, I think it's actually correct that an IDE produces fairly unintelligent code.

The smarter and more intelligent it gets, the harder it is for the less skilled programmer to edit it.

The skilled programmer can still improve the unintelligent code.

Re: Didn't see this coming: The Goldman Sachs Github Account

#87

Post by factorizer »

babarock wrote: post #13

I'm not entirely surprised. A few months ago (a year and a half! wow!) GS hired Ulrich Drepper, the longtime project lead of the GNU C library. I also read another article (no way I can find it again now) saying how big investment banks are hiring more and more software engineers. Disclaimer: I work in IT for a large investment bank which's gradually outsourcing all its IT department to south asian countries.

so you have two reasons to leave?

Re: Didn't see this coming: The Goldman Sachs Github Account

#88

Post by factorial »

gaius wrote: post #83
lordmatty wrote: post #74

I can understand the reaction on this community to the news, and I'm sure that there are elements of PR and recruitment strategy here, but I happen to know that the primary driver is pretty sound; job satisfaction for top employees. Goldmans has its share of top programmers and, like any company, is keen to retain them. One of these people made contributing to Open Source a major goal for last year. Well done to him,…

When I interviewed at GS last year, I was explicitly told that I would not be able to go on working on open source (they had checked out both my blog and my Github). This despite none of the technologies in my main project being in use in the group I was interviewing with...

What is the reasoning behind this policy? It seems quite arbitrary to me. I know of people having signed contracts that say that their employer owns (!) all the code they may write in their spare time.

Re: Didn't see this coming: The Goldman Sachs Github Account

#89

Post by UK-AL »

jabr wrote: post #56
ecopoesis wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Because Java has good, built-in, worldwide namespacing that always works? Or because Java has IDEs that pull in imports automatically so developers don't have to think useless shit? Or is it because you're fanboi who dislikes Java merely because it's Java and choose any opportunity, not matter how inappropriate, to disparege it. Java is by no means perfect, but let's at least pick on it for the things it actuall…

I can't speak for jlarocco, but my concern is not directly the import statements, but rather, what those import statements imply. That repo has 1,290 files. Excluding file pathnames containing 'test', there are 601 files. Of those, 430 are .java files. Java is complicit in that crime, but Enterprise Java is the bigger culprit. The library makes doing a map on an array cleaner for me, but behind the scenes it is using…

Many people find those patterns help them understand the code. I often see terrible bespoke code, where half the problems could fixed using a design pattern where those problems have already been considered.

It works both way, there are many acceptable times to use a design pattern, and many non-acceptable times.

Re: Didn't see this coming: The Goldman Sachs Github Account

#90

Post by reinhardt »

moomin wrote: post #76
nullspace wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to troll here, but in all honesty I thought GS was the kind of company which would prefer to spend money kicking puppies, than open sourcing a library they wrote. ;) This will surely earn them some cred from the programming community.

In the industry, they've actually got a formidable reputation for IT systems that actually work. I've worked with a few ex-GS people at various different firms, and none of them miss the hours, but all of them miss the IT.

Interesting. Do they miss Slang too?
Post reply on HN