|
9082365 wrote: Could we have a ban on people dying for the rest of the year now, please?
That...doesn't turn out too well[^]
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
God's definitely in one of those moods.
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed - one of the few radio and TV "personalities" of the era who was never associated with any sex offences...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Billy Joel: Only the good die young.
How do we preserve the wisdom men will need,
when their violent passions are spent?
- The Lost Horizon
|
|
|
|
|
That's probably why we are still going!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I could say: "Speak for yourself!", but I won't, because you are probably right!
How do we preserve the wisdom men will need,
when their violent passions are spent?
- The Lost Horizon
|
|
|
|
|
Damn it!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
Very sad. Does anyone remember the Janet and John stories submitted by TOGs?
|
|
|
|
|
xkcd: XKCD Stack[^]
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow! just ordered a copy for Windows...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Are you still using Windows 3? It's time to upgrade to Windows 95!
How do we preserve the wisdom men will need,
when their violent passions are spent?
- The Lost Horizon
|
|
|
|
|
No! Windows 3 is the only true path!
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Windows 3 is the only true path!
Path to where? Hell? Who are you? The Prince of Darkness?
How do we preserve the wisdom men will need,
when their violent passions are spent?
- The Lost Horizon
|
|
|
|
|
Well, to a nice little cul-de-sac with a quaint park and a duck pond.
|
|
|
|
|
How do we preserve the wisdom men will need,
when their violent passions are spent?
- The Lost Horizon
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe a JavaScript developer.
|
|
|
|
|
It's implemented in hardware?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Uncle" Bob Martin - YouTube[^]
Robert Martin on problems with software development and OOP.
Rather long, but worth it.
Skip the first few minutes of the video
|
|
|
|
|
After about 15-17 minutes he brought up the very issue of quick-and-dirty and reminded me why I hated university lectures back than...
It is a 'laboratory' lecture, that elusive to the real life development...Bad or good code is not a choice you made...
He's talking about a new system, developed from scratch with all the time you can master and no problem of founding...
...
But I went on
...
After all that introduction he comes up with OOP, like it is a cure for bad code - now that's really OMG!
...
I'm going to sleep...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: It is a 'laboratory' lecture, that elusive to the real life development...Bad or good code is not a choice you made... He does raise an interesting question though.
You wouldn't want a surgeon, or a builder, or whatever profession, making the same kinds of decisions developers make, "let's fix this quick and dirty". More importantly, they don't have to because no one want them to!
Then why do we developers have to?
And what strikes me most is that even these new systems, built from scratch, turn out garbage (I've seen a few)!
Just look at QA, most developers just don't understand their profession.
It's sad, really...
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: After all that introduction he comes up with OOP, like it is a cure for bad code - now that's really OMG! Nope, but some code literacy among programmers wouldn't hurt...
|
|
|
|
|
An interesting lecture, thanks, Sandor. I enjoyed Bob's water-molecule riff, but was baffled when he abruptly simply dropped the subject and switched to talking about SOLID. I also disagree with his statement there were only 100 programmers in 1960.
As someone who had some experience with Objective-C, back when, I agreed with his judgement that it was a terrible language.
His dismissive (jocular) statement that C#'s Delegates are not function pointers puzzles me. I wonder if it's the multi-cast feature of Delegates that influences his "judgement" ? On the other hand, I have trouble understanding why C# doesn't have an equivalent of 'Action and 'Func that is not a multi-cast Delegate under-the-hood.
I found his comments on polymorphism and flow-of-control beginning about 49:25 very interesting, although I am having trouble relating that to what you actually do with interfaces in C#; I have no background, unfortunately in C/C++.
Sander Rossel wrote: Just look at QA, most developers just don't understand their profession. Can you really generalize from what you see on QA to a hypothetical "profession" ? I can't, although "MacBeth," Act I, Scene VII, comes to mind: "... we but teach bloody instructions, which, being taught, return To plague the inventor."
«In art as in science there is no delight without the detail ... Let me repeat that unless these are thoroughly understood and remembered, all “general ideas” (so easily acquired, so profitably resold) must necessarily remain but worn passports allowing their bearers short cuts from one area of ignorance to another.» Vladimir Nabokov, commentary on translation of “Eugene Onegin.”
modified 31-Jan-16 3:20am.
|
|
|
|