For newly written code, things like readability, testability, and maintainability all can come in to whether it is "good" or not
For legacy stuff, Good code is code that works. Who cares how easy it is to read or test as long as it works?
The second one should also include "immutable". If it's hard to understand it will evolve easily to non working, and time spent on improvements can start to creep up very fast.
I have worked in very clever, solid code, but not easy to read. It was then maintained and extended by average, but competent programmers down the road, and turned into a big mess, only because it was so hard to understand.
In my experience, good code is easy to read, above all. That will make it easy to extend it coherently, find bugs and stuff. Also, if it doesn't work OK, it's easy to find out why. The single metric that saves time, money, and improves quality down the road is readability. Eveything else should be suject to that.
And, about the last point in the "article", "efficient", it's nonsense. Premature optimization is the root of all evil. You should _always_ follow the second rule of optimization (see http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?RulesOfOptimization ).
I have some awful, unreadable examples I could share in Java, PHP, Javascript and even C, but chosen language no longer forces you to write bad code. Maybe Perl, but I haven't seen it lately.
An AC, very close to first post, and it is actually spot on!
Unless you can get management to sign on to a mentality of "it will be done when it's right" rather than "it will be done on Thursday" you have no hope of achieving FLOSS levels of success. I'm not saying you shouldn't try your best, merely that you should be aware of your limitations and from whence they come up front.
"OS" mentality is that it will be done when it's _done_. Not when it's _right_. And it's tautologically true. You don't need management to change their mentality, only to _accept_ reality, and act accordingly. I know it might be too much to ask for, but it's not too much to ask.
While it does make sense to have a roadmap, release dates for new software are too often wrong. It's a good thing to keep yourself honest about expectations, and drive the development process, so you can get quality stuff, in reasonable timeframes, providing the greatest possible value.
Unrealistic expectations and pressure on estimates won't help you get there faster, or better. Being realistic will help your team improve estimations, and also help you complete stuff faster, and better.
You are right in your assessment, but there should be a solution for that.
Time and materials contracts can take care of the issues you are talking about. You can reject a pull request, but still pay for the hours. It's a lot cheaper to pay for the hours than to fight over them. If it's an employee, help them get better, refine your specs, or maybe move them or replace them, if they are not fit for _that_ project. If it's a contractor, change contractors if they are bad.
If you are contracting software development, it's always better to assume some risks yourself, because that keeps your providers focused on helping you reach your objective, and not contract stuff. If you don't want to take risks, you shouldn't be developing software in the first place, but buying ready-made solutions.
I don't know whether what he says is true, but beggars are not a typical sight in communism. In a communist state, they would either not get much gain by begging on their streets (think Cuba, at least when foreigners are not involved), and or be thrown in jail by doing it (like what they say happens in North Korea) Also, political leaders enjoying luxury goods and meals is the norm in most countries, communist ("real" or not) or otherwise.
I find it quite believable, seeing how the Venezuelan govt simply issues orders to all ISPs to block the IP ranges of sites that make them uncomfortable; a famous victim is DolarToday.com, a site that tracks the black market currency exchange rate and now publishes unflattering news and opinion. I'd include a few traceroutes but I'm posting from my phone. Even pastebin.com was blocked for more than a year (haven't checked recently) because a list of URLs with leaked emails wad posted there.
Currency black markets are not "unconfortable", they are _illegal_. I'm sure there are examples of censorship in Venezuela, but that's not one.
Holy crap, that's the last place I'd expect a cable. It sounds like the only reason they did that is politics because of Chavez. The latency will suck.
My city, Montevideo, an oldish city, with some similarities to Havana, was also wired by a state owned telco with fiber. Also most of the urban country is already fibered. It's taking a bit over a couple of years, most of the city is covered, and the smallest plan is 30 dollars (or free if you a single Giga per month is enough for you). Of course, 35 dollars in Cuba might be expensive, but also most of the cost they had here was labor, construction salaries are high. They wouldn't have that problem over there. They could even have you dig the ditches yourself if you want internet, dammit.
Anyhow, I would go with LTE. It's probably a lot cheaper, and flexible enough.
Networked is not the same. Internet connected or something like that might be better. Also, networked _might_ imply wired for some, while IoT is more in the line of wireless, standalone. Internet enabled is good, but already means other old, unrelated things.
It is a new trend, that is actually gaining some momentum right now, cheap systems on chip, BLE, and stuff, and it needs a name, so others what you are talking about. IoT is as good a name as any other. It doesn't really bother me, even if it's silly.
No reason to keep whining about it. There are possibly tens of thousands of tech people reading this today, if you have a better name, descriptive, not stupid, or whatever, please share it, below the line ----v , we might like it, start using it instead of IoT, and it just might catch on. ------
They are identical on paper, but not for a person.
It's a lot easier to get energy from doughnuts than from broccoli.
It's 5 medium doughnuts versus 5 broccoli bunches. I'm pretty sure I can have 5 doughnuts in a sitting, but not 5 broccoli bunches.
There's a lot of fiber in broccoli, so even if you manage to have all that broccoli, you will have a hard time extracting many calories from it. In any case, it will be slow, so at least it keeps you full for a longer time than doughnuts.
That's what is being done nowadays, counting calories.
The problem is that calorie consumption is not constant. It's more like household economy.
If you earn (eat) a lot every day, you will probably end up with a lot of savings (belly fat).
One way of getting rid of those savings (belly fat) is taking a lower paying job (dieting). The problem is that your savings don't magically dissappear, and you can make changes that allow you to keep your savings (fat), even with a lower income (daily calorie intake).
Another way you can get rid of your savings is just spending more daily (like exercise). The problem is that, if you have a good enough income (daily intake), and sizable savings, you will only lose capital (weight) in the long run, no sizable short term effect.
So, a fat person body works, in what respects to calories, like a financially savvy household. Going skinny would be like going broke. Some of us could benefit from a way to teach our bodies to do a bit worse in the calorie finance department. Could be a lot easier than just dieting, exercising or both.
I use Windows 8 at one of my computers at home. Those instructions don't work there. You need to do some additional steps before, to summon the "Open Network Center" option.
In any case, what I was responding to the troll was not that Ubuntu has a great magic and beautiful way of changing the IP, only that it doesn't require a console. Like you explained, in most Windows versions, the process is more or less the same, which was my point.
Posting from a corporate desktop, using Ubuntu, there are 6 Ubuntus out of 10 desktops around me. This is not a Fortune 500 company, but it's a public company. I also read Slashdot, I have seen news of corporations using Ubuntu
Linux is was not, and is not meant to be anything but a hobby OS for someones spare time, or a companies spare time that they can develop a UI for and deploy their own flavors (android, Red Hat, Ubuntu, etc.) Linux is far too complicated for the everyday user to understand. Even something as simple as entering a static IP address sometimes requires going back to the terminal windows (command prompt) and setting it the hard way. And THAT's the problem with Linux! It was never meant to be a GUI OS just like it's parent, UNIX.
That's why desktop users use Ubuntu. 1 - Open network meny by clicking network indicator at the top bar of the desktop 2 - Choose "edit connections" 3 - Choose the connection you want to edit - click "edit" 4 - Click "IPv4 settings" 5 - Change IP
Please, remind me how that's done in windows 8.1. Feel free to explain differences with windows 8, 7 , XP.
The drivers for Linux SUCK and that's because it's an open source OS and there's no one "single" distro.
Just like any other OS. Supported hardware works, and in this case, backwards compatibility is maintained. Unsupported hardware, shockingly, doesn't work.
Give us a nice, simple, standard GUI without a bazillion customisations, and with the ability to to just install an app from the GUI and run it from the GUI, and Linux might actually work on the desktop.
You can find all of that at http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop/ . Millions of people are already using it, for years now. The only challenge it might have, is that it complies with the simplicity and ease of use you demand. But that's for hardcore users to care about, and they have alternatives.
It's not his fault. Linux is a kernel, an a great one at that. GNU is a desktop, and isn't dominant right now, but it's very popular among large groups of users, some corporate included.
You can print in a plethora of different materials; this includes metals and extremely hard plastics.
The strength and martial properties of medals comes from the arrangement of the crystal lattices. These are things that 3D printing cannot do.
These are things that 3D printing doesn't do maybe. But most certaintly it is feasible. And once that's achieved, you will be able to create metals with a la carte properties.
Actually, avoiding certain words makes sense if those words bolster a legal case against GM, as a partial admission of guilt. Same reason your side mirrors still bear that stupid warning about objects being closer than they appear. Fix your silly legal system that allows anyone to sue anyone over anything, and if their case has any merit, gives them a chance to win the damages or out of court settlement lottery.
With great power, comes great responsibility.
In Europe, or here in some parts of Latin America, the government will stand in the way of business, certifying what you can and cannot do, forcing you to meet certain safety standards, and to provide specific warranties for customers. Even customers or workers can have a say in what companies can and cannot do. Civil responsibility when something goes wrong is not so high, because the company can use their compl|
In the US, people don't like government meddling in the way of companies and business are a lot freer to do business as they see fit. The most important thing standing in the way of a company harming their customers or others, to improve the bottom line, is the threat of losing a whole lot of money in a lawsuit. If you remove that part, there would be nothing to balance the profit vs safety equation.
product A is owned by commercial company with billions of dollars and developers backing the product
product B is written by some really smart people in their free time that may help you on a forum or in an IRC chat room if they can
Product C is free, maintained by a mid sized company, and they sell support contracts Product D is proprietary, owned by a company that might be bought by the competitors, who may or may not keep supporting your product Product E is a great software product, proprietary, but your company is not in the target market, so licensing and support don't match your needs Product F is proprietary, and you might need small development tasks on top of the product. Only can buy from the owner. Product G is free, and you might need small development tasks on top of the product. You can buy from the developer, build your own, contract, whatever.
Add to that, whether there is an easy way out should the unthinkable happen (end of life for products). Does the software support industry standards? Are there alternative implementations of these standards? Have you tested compatibility?
I'm not hiding the technical or strategic advantages some proprietary products might have over free ones, but they are stated everywhere, only trying to lay out more aspects you need to care about.
I think regarding the article you just need to do your job, and lay out all the things you consider. Free software is almost always better in the long run, but it's only sensible to lay out everything you considered, so others can make the best decision.
No way. I live in Uruguay, we grow some fruit here, but also import a lot. Local fruit usually looks like you picked it up from a tree. Imported fruit looks more uniform, and more colorful, and usually has some kind of wax to protect it. They also have small labels in each piece, some times. Also, local fruit smells like fruit, imported fruit has no smell, in comparison.
Of course, YMMV, but the closer you are to the source, it's easier to get fresher produce.
Slashdot Mirror
For newly written code, things like readability, testability, and maintainability all can come in to whether it is "good" or not
For legacy stuff, Good code is code that works. Who cares how easy it is to read or test as long as it works?
The second one should also include "immutable". If it's hard to understand it will evolve easily to non working, and time spent on improvements can start to creep up very fast.
I have worked in very clever, solid code, but not easy to read. It was then maintained and extended by average, but competent programmers down the road, and turned into a big mess, only because it was so hard to understand.
In my experience, good code is easy to read, above all. That will make it easy to extend it coherently, find bugs and stuff. Also, if it doesn't work OK, it's easy to find out why. The single metric that saves time, money, and improves quality down the road is readability. Eveything else should be suject to that.
And, about the last point in the "article", "efficient", it's nonsense. Premature optimization is the root of all evil. You should _always_ follow the second rule of optimization (see http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?RulesOfOptimization ).
PHP can be good or bad, like any other code. Lately it's getting better.
As an example, do you think this looks bad? Looks pretty good to me.
https://github.com/symfony/sym...
I have some awful, unreadable examples I could share in Java, PHP, Javascript and even C, but chosen language no longer forces you to write bad code. Maybe Perl, but I haven't seen it lately.
An AC, very close to first post, and it is actually spot on!
Unless you can get management to sign on to a mentality of "it will be done when it's right" rather than "it will be done on Thursday" you have no hope of achieving FLOSS levels of success. I'm not saying you shouldn't try your best, merely that you should be aware of your limitations and from whence they come up front.
"OS" mentality is that it will be done when it's _done_. Not when it's _right_.
And it's tautologically true. You don't need management to change their mentality, only to _accept_ reality, and act accordingly. I know it might be too much to ask for, but it's not too much to ask.
While it does make sense to have a roadmap, release dates for new software are too often wrong. It's a good thing to keep yourself honest about expectations, and drive the development process, so you can get quality stuff, in reasonable timeframes, providing the greatest possible value.
Unrealistic expectations and pressure on estimates won't help you get there faster, or better. Being realistic will help your team improve estimations, and also help you complete stuff faster, and better.
You are right in your assessment, but there should be a solution for that.
Time and materials contracts can take care of the issues you are talking about. You can reject a pull request, but still pay for the hours.
It's a lot cheaper to pay for the hours than to fight over them. If it's an employee, help them get better, refine your specs, or maybe move them or replace them, if they are not fit for _that_ project. If it's a contractor, change contractors if they are bad.
If you are contracting software development, it's always better to assume some risks yourself, because that keeps your providers focused on helping you reach your objective, and not contract stuff. If you don't want to take risks, you shouldn't be developing software in the first place, but buying ready-made solutions.
.
I don't know whether what he says is true, but beggars are not a typical sight in communism.
In a communist state, they would either not get much gain by begging on their streets (think Cuba, at least when foreigners are not involved), and or be thrown in jail by doing it (like what they say happens in North Korea)
Also, political leaders enjoying luxury goods and meals is the norm in most countries, communist ("real" or not) or otherwise.
It's not that common for companies to have principles to begin with, tough.
I find it quite believable, seeing how the Venezuelan govt simply issues orders to all ISPs to block the IP ranges of sites that make them uncomfortable; a famous victim is DolarToday.com, a site that tracks the black market currency exchange rate and now publishes unflattering news and opinion. I'd include a few traceroutes but I'm posting from my phone. Even pastebin.com was blocked for more than a year (haven't checked recently) because a list of URLs with leaked emails wad posted there.
Currency black markets are not "unconfortable", they are _illegal_. I'm sure there are examples of censorship in Venezuela, but that's not one.
Holy crap, that's the last place I'd expect a cable. It sounds like the only reason they did that is politics because of Chavez. The latency will suck.
The latency to where?
Latency to Venezuela can be good.
My city, Montevideo, an oldish city, with some similarities to Havana, was also wired by a state owned telco with fiber. Also most of the urban country is already fibered.
It's taking a bit over a couple of years, most of the city is covered, and the smallest plan is 30 dollars (or free if you a single Giga per month is enough for you).
Of course, 35 dollars in Cuba might be expensive, but also most of the cost they had here was labor, construction salaries are high. They wouldn't have that problem over there. They could even have you dig the ditches yourself if you want internet, dammit.
Anyhow, I would go with LTE. It's probably a lot cheaper, and flexible enough.
"It has so far been tested only on light-insensitive retinas from embryonic chicks, "
OMG!! They are called ladies, not "chicks".
Why would the Chinese government pay for something western governments get for free?
Networked is not the same. Internet connected or something like that might be better.
Also, networked _might_ imply wired for some, while IoT is more in the line of wireless, standalone.
Internet enabled is good, but already means other old, unrelated things.
It is a new trend, that is actually gaining some momentum right now, cheap systems on chip, BLE, and stuff, and it needs a name, so others what you are talking about. IoT is as good a name as any other. It doesn't really bother me, even if it's silly.
No reason to keep whining about it. There are possibly tens of thousands of tech people reading this today, if you have a better name, descriptive, not stupid, or whatever, please share it, below the line ----v , we might like it, start using it instead of IoT, and it just might catch on.
------
They are identical on paper, but not for a person.
It's a lot easier to get energy from doughnuts than from broccoli.
It's 5 medium doughnuts versus 5 broccoli bunches. I'm pretty sure I can have 5 doughnuts in a sitting, but not 5 broccoli bunches.
There's a lot of fiber in broccoli, so even if you manage to have all that broccoli, you will have a hard time extracting many calories from it. In any case, it will be slow, so at least it keeps you full for a longer time than doughnuts.
That's what is being done nowadays, counting calories.
The problem is that calorie consumption is not constant. It's more like household economy.
If you earn (eat) a lot every day, you will probably end up with a lot of savings (belly fat).
One way of getting rid of those savings (belly fat) is taking a lower paying job (dieting). The problem is that your savings don't magically dissappear, and you can make changes that allow you to keep your savings (fat), even with a lower income (daily calorie intake).
Another way you can get rid of your savings is just spending more daily (like exercise). The problem is that, if you have a good enough income (daily intake), and sizable savings, you will only lose capital (weight) in the long run, no sizable short term effect.
So, a fat person body works, in what respects to calories, like a financially savvy household. Going skinny would be like going broke. Some of us could benefit from a way to teach our bodies to do a bit worse in the calorie finance department. Could be a lot easier than just dieting, exercising or both.
Dumbass.
The most terrifying moment in history was Nagasaki, because they already knew what happened in Hiroshima.
I use Windows 8 at one of my computers at home.
Those instructions don't work there. You need to do some additional steps before, to summon the "Open Network Center" option.
In any case, what I was responding to the troll was not that Ubuntu has a great magic and beautiful way of changing the IP, only that it doesn't require a console.
Like you explained, in most Windows versions, the process is more or less the same, which was my point.
Posting from a corporate desktop, using Ubuntu, there are 6 Ubuntus out of 10 desktops around me.
This is not a Fortune 500 company, but it's a public company.
I also read Slashdot, I have seen news of corporations using Ubuntu
Feeding the shill/troll here...
Linux is was not, and is not meant to be anything but a hobby OS for someones spare time, or a companies spare time that they can develop a UI for and deploy their own flavors (android, Red Hat, Ubuntu, etc.) Linux is far too complicated for the everyday user to understand. Even something as simple as entering a static IP address sometimes requires going back to the terminal windows (command prompt) and setting it the hard way. And THAT's the problem with Linux! It was never meant to be a GUI OS just like it's parent, UNIX.
That's why desktop users use Ubuntu.
1 - Open network meny by clicking network indicator at the top bar of the desktop
2 - Choose "edit connections"
3 - Choose the connection you want to edit - click "edit"
4 - Click "IPv4 settings"
5 - Change IP
Please, remind me how that's done in windows 8.1. Feel free to explain differences with windows 8, 7 , XP.
The drivers for Linux SUCK and that's because it's an open source OS and there's no one "single" distro.
Just like any other OS. Supported hardware works, and in this case, backwards compatibility is maintained. Unsupported hardware, shockingly, doesn't work.
Give us a nice, simple, standard GUI without a bazillion customisations, and with the ability to to just install an app from the GUI and run it from the GUI, and Linux might actually work on the desktop.
You can find all of that at http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop/ .
Millions of people are already using it, for years now.
The only challenge it might have, is that it complies with the simplicity and ease of use you demand. But that's for hardcore users to care about, and they have alternatives.
It's not his fault.
Linux is a kernel, an a great one at that.
GNU is a desktop, and isn't dominant right now, but it's very popular among large groups of users, some corporate included.
You can print in a plethora of different materials; this includes metals and extremely hard plastics.
The strength and martial properties of medals comes from the arrangement of the crystal lattices. These are things that 3D printing cannot do.
These are things that 3D printing doesn't do maybe. But most certaintly it is feasible. And once that's achieved, you will be able to create metals with a la carte properties.
Tell that to google search, or wolfram alpha
Actually, avoiding certain words makes sense if those words bolster a legal case against GM, as a partial admission of guilt. Same reason your side mirrors still bear that stupid warning about objects being closer than they appear. Fix your silly legal system that allows anyone to sue anyone over anything, and if their case has any merit, gives them a chance to win the damages or out of court settlement lottery.
With great power, comes great responsibility.
In Europe, or here in some parts of Latin America, the government will stand in the way of business, certifying what you can and cannot do, forcing you to meet certain safety standards, and to provide specific warranties for customers. Even customers or workers can have a say in what companies can and cannot do. Civil responsibility when something goes wrong is not so high, because the company can use their compl|
In the US, people don't like government meddling in the way of companies and business are a lot freer to do business as they see fit. The most important thing standing in the way of a company harming their customers or others, to improve the bottom line, is the threat of losing a whole lot of money in a lawsuit. If you remove that part, there would be nothing to balance the profit vs safety equation.
Good idea, but incomplete:
exactly lay out the facts:
product A is owned by commercial company with billions of dollars and developers backing the product
product B is written by some really smart people in their free time that may help you on a forum or in an IRC chat room if they can
Product C is free, maintained by a mid sized company, and they sell support contracts
Product D is proprietary, owned by a company that might be bought by the competitors, who may or may not keep supporting your product
Product E is a great software product, proprietary, but your company is not in the target market, so licensing and support don't match your needs
Product F is proprietary, and you might need small development tasks on top of the product. Only can buy from the owner.
Product G is free, and you might need small development tasks on top of the product. You can buy from the developer, build your own, contract, whatever.
Add to that, whether there is an easy way out should the unthinkable happen (end of life for products). Does the software support industry standards? Are there alternative implementations of these standards? Have you tested compatibility?
I'm not hiding the technical or strategic advantages some proprietary products might have over free ones, but they are stated everywhere, only trying to lay out more aspects you need to care about.
I think regarding the article you just need to do your job, and lay out all the things you consider. Free software is almost always better in the long run, but it's only sensible to lay out everything you considered, so others can make the best decision.
No way.
I live in Uruguay, we grow some fruit here, but also import a lot. Local fruit usually looks like you picked it up from a tree.
Imported fruit looks more uniform, and more colorful, and usually has some kind of wax to protect it. They also have small labels in each piece, some times.
Also, local fruit smells like fruit, imported fruit has no smell, in comparison.
Of course, YMMV, but the closer you are to the source, it's easier to get fresher produce.