Which part of "Any significant chunk of code is highly complex and detailed." did you fail to realise I was responding to?
Are you really telling me that it's impossible to implement extensive features in a system without writing pseudo-code and understanding the whole solution in your head at once?
Think that one through for a few minutes.
If the code hasn't been written yet then there's nothing to understand. Forgive me for wanting some professionalism around here, but try taking an engineering approach to things.
Write simple code. Build complex behaviour from simple start points. Unless you're doing some serious mathematics (in which case it'll have an elegance of its own to those that comprehend the maths) then there's no real need for complicated code that is hard to understand.
Are you going to be the guy that says 'sorry honey
No, I'm going to be the guy using his fucking mobile phone.
Many people here moving into a new house don't get a fixed line phone. Between mobile and Skype (for international calls) they have all their telephony needs met.
You could gather all the requirements up front. Analyse them. Identify the patterns of interaction between the system and its environment. Specify a framework to enable re-use of common capabilities. Identify major system components needed to implement the functionality. Define an object model for each of those components. For each object of each component of each framework for each type of interaction you could specify the object interactions needed. You could use those to define operations on objects, their parameters and return types. You could document all pre- and post-conditions for calling those operations, including all possible error conditions. You could depict the interactions between the objects by identifying which operations are called from within each of the operations on any given object. You could use all this information to generate the objects, their operations, the input validation on their parameters.
What I've never understood is exactly how this is meant to work.
Sure, you're done all the planning stuff before you start writing C++, or Java, or VB. Unfortunately you've also written a lot of code. It's not in a formally defined programming language, but it's there, in your diagrams, your case tool, your documentation.
Why would you code in those tools, where you're still several steps away from compilable code that you can easily automate testing? Why would you define to that level of detail without testing first.
It happens. It's possible to do in an iterative development environment (as opposed to waterfall) too. It also has decades of failed projects demonstrating that for most business system development this approach is heavily sub-optimal.
We're finally starting to get to the level where people can pull together pre-built components into a working system using drag-drop tools and minimal technical skill. I believe that can work, and over the next decade I expect to see a lot more of it.
At that point you're constructing; to really work you need good construction materials. Right now we lack those and we lack the tools for working with them.
In the meantime I'm going to advocate writing code in code. It's easier to test, it's easier to change, and if you pair-program then it's easier to design, to write and to get live with minimal bugs.
Unless the person breaking in was armed with lethal weapons and you have a reasonable and genuine belief that your life was in danger then you're probably going to get prosecuted for murder.
If they have a knife then you're still going to get prosecuted.
If they have a knife and it's dripping with the blood of your decapitated mother then you'll get prosecuted for firearms offences if the gun isn't completely legal.
It's quite hard to shoot someone legally here unless you're in the police.
Of course, if you're a policeman then - shooting a man for the heinous crime of carrying a table leg down the street is just fine - shooting Brazilians for getting on a train is just fine - shooting someone for being asleep, naked, in their own bed, in their own home.. is just fine
Anyway, last time someone broke into my house with me there, I slept straight through it.
This is England. Papers do not get delivered to sit in your driveway. We have weather here; a paper on a driveway ceases to be a readable publication and becomes litter in a matter of seconds.
What sort of delivery service throws your goods on the ground anyway?
Plus of course most British homes don't have a driveway (although houses of affluent people generally do).
Tax records in the UK do not have photos of property in them. Tax records in the UK are not publicly accessible. Counties in the UK do not keep tax records.
All these pootypeople talking about privacy clearly don't know the fucking law.
You must've discovered the 'trade up' mechanism by now?
Women don't trust, like or touch a man with no girlfriend. Unless they're dog-ugly.
So you find one like that and ask her out.
Suddenly you're attached. You're able to keep a woman happy. Sure, she's pig ugly, but women don't work on looks as much, so they don't worry about that.
This makes you inherently more attractive to women. It also means you're less likely to hit on them, so you're safer to talk to, and to flirt with.
At this point you can trade in the ugly girlfriend for a slightly prettier one.
It only takes 4-5 trades to hit 'model'...
(disclaimer: I don't do this. I go straight for the one I want in the first place. I spend a lot of time single)
Game developers need to understand that there is no magical gameplay formula for single player games; there is only the story
I play a game once for the story. I play it many times for the gameplay.
Gameplay is king. Give me as many stories as you like, but do note the general theme of posters that "yet another FPS" is always going to struggle because it doesn't give you a gameplay experience you haven't had already.
Doom 2 set the bar, Quake gave you the technology, Duke Nukem 3D showed you how to wrap a story around it and Unreal Tournament took it online properly. All FPS since then are derivative; the successful ones have all added something new to the mix (e.g. BF1942 added vehicles..)
Story is always appreciated, but even Starcraft would've failed to sell without the underlying gameplay.
I think as soon as you post 2 of the questions the entire paper gets pulled.
You may face action for causing the cost of creating and re-distributing a new exam paper but in that scenario it's more analogous to a trade secret - once it's gone, it's never coming back.
Indeed. Application for employment is far more sensitive.
Call me a bleeding liberal commie but I kind of like the idea that your sexual preferences should not preclude you from doing a job, and that you can reasonably expect to apply for one without needing to disclose when you last got laid.
15 bullets is hardly an inordinate amount. Hell, when I was shooting you bought them 50 at a time.
And you can kill 15 people with less than 15 bullets. I recall reading about a particular executioner (Spanish or Mexican civil war, I think) that lined up 6-7 victims at a time to save on ammunition. Sadly I can't find any online references (although I did just lose an hour of my life looking - Republican Marriage is intriguing, for instance).
Slashdot Mirror
Which part of "Any significant chunk of code is highly complex and detailed." did you fail to realise I was responding to?
Are you really telling me that it's impossible to implement extensive features in a system without writing pseudo-code and understanding the whole solution in your head at once?
Think that one through for a few minutes.
If the code hasn't been written yet then there's nothing to understand. Forgive me for wanting some professionalism around here, but try taking an engineering approach to things.
Write simple code. Build complex behaviour from simple start points. Unless you're doing some serious mathematics (in which case it'll have an elegance of its own to those that comprehend the maths) then there's no real need for complicated code that is hard to understand.
To him the raid had no justification and was groundless. Where's the lie?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/unwarranted
Are you going to be the guy that says 'sorry honey
No, I'm going to be the guy using his fucking mobile phone.
Many people here moving into a new house don't get a fixed line phone. Between mobile and Skype (for international calls) they have all their telephony needs met.
Which backwards country are you living in?
You could gather all the requirements up front.
Analyse them.
Identify the patterns of interaction between the system and its environment.
Specify a framework to enable re-use of common capabilities.
Identify major system components needed to implement the functionality.
Define an object model for each of those components.
For each object of each component of each framework for each type of interaction you could specify the object interactions needed.
You could use those to define operations on objects, their parameters and return types.
You could document all pre- and post-conditions for calling those operations, including all possible error conditions.
You could depict the interactions between the objects by identifying which operations are called from within each of the operations on any given object.
You could use all this information to generate the objects, their operations, the input validation on their parameters.
What I've never understood is exactly how this is meant to work.
Sure, you're done all the planning stuff before you start writing C++, or Java, or VB. Unfortunately you've also written a lot of code. It's not in a formally defined programming language, but it's there, in your diagrams, your case tool, your documentation.
Why would you code in those tools, where you're still several steps away from compilable code that you can easily automate testing? Why would you define to that level of detail without testing first.
It happens. It's possible to do in an iterative development environment (as opposed to waterfall) too. It also has decades of failed projects demonstrating that for most business system development this approach is heavily sub-optimal.
We're finally starting to get to the level where people can pull together pre-built components into a working system using drag-drop tools and minimal technical skill. I believe that can work, and over the next decade I expect to see a lot more of it.
At that point you're constructing; to really work you need good construction materials. Right now we lack those and we lack the tools for working with them.
In the meantime I'm going to advocate writing code in code. It's easier to test, it's easier to change, and if you pair-program then it's easier to design, to write and to get live with minimal bugs.
You'd benefit from pair programming.
Your code is clearly too complicated. If you can't glance at it and tell what's going on, it's too complicated.
Pair programming results in simpler, clearer code. It has to, for the partner to be able to keep up with the driver.
As a moderately experienced developer I did work in the same way. As a very experienced developer I moved on from that to writing far simpler code.
The only trade-off is a tiny overhead in performance, and if I ever write device drivers again I'll address that then.
Or, depending on the nature of the datacentre and the servers it housed, around 4 racks.
Hardware gets expensive fast.
In the UK, it probably is.
Unless the person breaking in was armed with lethal weapons and you have a reasonable and genuine belief that your life was in danger then you're probably going to get prosecuted for murder.
If they have a knife then you're still going to get prosecuted.
If they have a knife and it's dripping with the blood of your decapitated mother then you'll get prosecuted for firearms offences if the gun isn't completely legal.
It's quite hard to shoot someone legally here unless you're in the police.
Of course, if you're a policeman then
- shooting a man for the heinous crime of carrying a table leg down the street is just fine
- shooting Brazilians for getting on a train is just fine
- shooting someone for being asleep, naked, in their own bed, in their own home.. is just fine
Anyway, last time someone broke into my house with me there, I slept straight through it.
This is England. Papers do not get delivered to sit in your driveway. We have weather here; a paper on a driveway ceases to be a readable publication and becomes litter in a matter of seconds.
What sort of delivery service throws your goods on the ground anyway?
Plus of course most British homes don't have a driveway (although houses of affluent people generally do).
Sorry, but with all respect, what the fuck?
Tax records in the UK do not have photos of property in them.
Tax records in the UK are not publicly accessible.
Counties in the UK do not keep tax records.
All these pootypeople talking about privacy clearly don't know the fucking law.
Those stories in OMG PONIES would've been the absolute dogs bollocks.
Indeed, should've made it "Fewer than 6 digit UID" then the achievements would've been cumulative.
Or in my experience, they're ungodly freaky in bed, which sadly didn't translate to awesome.
Oh well, she enjoyed it anyway..
You must've discovered the 'trade up' mechanism by now?
Women don't trust, like or touch a man with no girlfriend. Unless they're dog-ugly.
So you find one like that and ask her out.
Suddenly you're attached. You're able to keep a woman happy. Sure, she's pig ugly, but women don't work on looks as much, so they don't worry about that.
This makes you inherently more attractive to women. It also means you're less likely to hit on them, so you're safer to talk to, and to flirt with.
At this point you can trade in the ugly girlfriend for a slightly prettier one.
It only takes 4-5 trades to hit 'model'...
(disclaimer: I don't do this. I go straight for the one I want in the first place. I spend a lot of time single)
Game developers need to understand that there is no magical gameplay formula for single player games; there is only the story
I play a game once for the story.
I play it many times for the gameplay.
Gameplay is king. Give me as many stories as you like, but do note the general theme of posters that "yet another FPS" is always going to struggle because it doesn't give you a gameplay experience you haven't had already.
Doom 2 set the bar, Quake gave you the technology, Duke Nukem 3D showed you how to wrap a story around it and Unreal Tournament took it online properly. All FPS since then are derivative; the successful ones have all added something new to the mix (e.g. BF1942 added vehicles..)
Story is always appreciated, but even Starcraft would've failed to sell without the underlying gameplay.
I hit the salary cap at 30. I'd have had to switch to a software company or a consultancy to get a payrise and keep developing.
I went into architecture instead. Christopher Alexander is my hero..
Don't forget Martin Fowler, hardly a spring chicken.
Cockburn's never in his mid thirties. Is he?
TDD has fuck all to do with requirements analysis, and a hell of a lot more to do with proper system design.
It is new (compared to 20y ago), and it has significantly shifted the minimum acceptable level for software engineering.
Reason? Many many times. Hell, that's just today.
Chance? Sadly not. At least, not without consequences I'm not yet ready to suffer.
At a guess, Eva would be his Eve.
Sorry, but if you're going to try a joke, at least avoid the obviously shite ones.
Who is the German Federal Minister for Men?
The British Government are. Images of sexual violence are being made illegal, even if made consensually.
Bit of a blow for the bondage porn industry really..
I think as soon as you post 2 of the questions the entire paper gets pulled.
You may face action for causing the cost of creating and re-distributing a new exam paper but in that scenario it's more analogous to a trade secret - once it's gone, it's never coming back.
Indeed. Application for employment is far more sensitive.
Call me a bleeding liberal commie but I kind of like the idea that your sexual preferences should not preclude you from doing a job, and that you can reasonably expect to apply for one without needing to disclose when you last got laid.
To be fair, that wasn't a racist thing. The Catholics also persecuted a hell of a lot of Protestants too.
Religious fuckwits, both sides.
15 bullets is hardly an inordinate amount. Hell, when I was shooting you bought them 50 at a time.
And you can kill 15 people with less than 15 bullets. I recall reading about a particular executioner (Spanish or Mexican civil war, I think) that lined up 6-7 victims at a time to save on ammunition. Sadly I can't find any online references (although I did just lose an hour of my life looking - Republican Marriage is intriguing, for instance).