|
how!! posted:Lets see something significant that you've created i wrote a bot that says butt.
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 05:58 |
|
|
how!! posted:Lets see something significant that you've created hahaha you loving idiot
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:01
|
|
|
WHOIS John Galt posted:lol oh poo poo son do you even know who you're talking to I'm not 'coming at' anyone. People who actually do create things don't poo poo on other people's work.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:04
|
|
|
how!! posted:I'm not 'coming at' anyone. lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
btw hungarian notation's cool, i use it in JavaScript™ to distinguish jquery objects from DOM refs
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
let me tell you about a guy named linus
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:05
|
|
|
tef posted:i wrote a bot that says butt. I can buttfirm this
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
how!! posted:I'm not 'coming at' anyone. people who have created good things in a certain domain can speak critically from a position of experience
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
how!! posted:I'm not 'coming at' anyone. &nbps;ghjhgfdefg
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
lmbo
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
how!! posted:People who actually do create things don't poo poo on other people's work. holy poo poo, we don't need shaggar and tbc anymore
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:08
|
|
|
how!! posted:
bronze this post so that it may be remembered for ever
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:08
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:09
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:13
|
|
|
ps i'm going to rewrite cheesebot i think
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:13
|
|
|
Real Soon Now
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:14
|
|
|
how!! posted:I'm not 'coming at' anyone. this pretty much explains how much contact you've had with people who create things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:15
|
|
|
somebody write a competent not-siri bot so i can ban siri for loving ever and let you be the yosbot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:18
|
|
|
Jonny 290 posted:somebody write a competent not-siri bot so i can ban siri for loving ever and let you be the yosbot. what oh this is an irc thing, i should get on that more
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:21
|
|
|
tef posted:i wrote a bot that says butt. literally the best program.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
no srs tho is how!! nbv4?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
based on his github, yes
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:34
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:36
|
|
|
lowtax said he can't make requested forum changes because the code needs a rewrite, this could be the chance you are looking for how!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
just think, no one could ever trash talk you here again because they would be using your own creation to do so!
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:40
|
|
|
rotor posted:orms are generally really lovely imo they have their uses not for mapping your objects to a relational database, mind you, but as a friendlier syntax for evolving the schema and writing your queries when you're your own DBA
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:41
|
|
|
isn't a rewrite a death sentence tho
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:42
|
|
|
Mesothelioma posted:isn't a rewrite a death sentence tho only if joel spolsky does it
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
spolsky's advice about rewrites is good tho
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
how!! posted:Lets see something significant that you've created 5
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
Mesothelioma posted:isn't a rewrite a death sentence tho Its only a death sentence if you go into it with the exact same mindset as you did going into the first write. there has been tons of "complete code re-writes" that have been successful.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:50
|
|
|
Gazpacho posted:spolsky's advice about rewrites is good tho nah, it isn't. it claims rewrites are always bad. but they aren't. sometimes you hit platform limitations. sometimes you can get a fresh copy working within a week. and the example he cites, well netscape didn't throw it all away to rewrite it from scratch so much. especially after 4.0 4.0 was the big rewrite. they bought out another company, and in reverse takeover fashion, 4.0 was built around groupware, instead of around the code base. then firefox came out, that was also another rewrite. the problem is not rewriting. it is doing nothing for many years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
how!! posted:Its only a death sentence if you go into it with the exact same mindset as you did going into the first write. there has been tons of "complete code re-writes" that have been successful. the mindset is "I could totally rewrite all of this to make it cleaner"
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
so yeah, spolksy says they are uniformly bad, citing a rewritten product that languished on the next version, that was then replaced by a rewritten product. "The old mantra build one to throw away is dangerous when applied to large scale commercial applications." the idea is you throw it away before putting it into service. "It's important to remember that when you start from scratch there is absolutely no reason to believe that you are going to do a better job than you did the first time." this is true in the sense that a rewrite doesn't guarantee, but there are many, many reasons why you can do a better job. often, the problem you're trying to solve now is different. sometimes, the code doesn't work properly. then again, the rewrites I have done have mostly worked by the chernobyl pattern. cover the old thing in concrete.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
something just came in the mail, courtesy of no starch press! this is a thick rear end book! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 20:02
|
|
|
tef posted:nah, it isn't. it claims rewrites are always bad. but they aren't. complete rewrites are fine for small projects but once you start producing large systems you have to start chunking off pieces of it. if you want to do a complete rewrite of your tinyurl extension, fine, whatever if you want to do a complete rewrite of your ticketing system then set sail for dick
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
rotor posted:set sail for dick i dont really know if this is generally regarded as something to avoid, but that's how i meant it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
tef posted:the problem is not rewriting. it is doing nothing for many years. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
gucci void main posted:this is a thick rear end book! yes 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 20:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 05:58 |
|
|
rotor posted:complete rewrites are fine for small projects but once you start producing large systems you have to start chunking off pieces of it. that's why you see more systems like twitter moving to a service oriented architecture, because then you can decouple things like tweet storage and follow graphs and rewrite them as long as they fulfill their obligations https://vimeo.com/55503728 (http://vimeo.com/55503728 it's 40 minutes)
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 20:09
|
|