It is just that I do also think the type of error the 2016 bug is can indeed be attributed to the "duct tape programming" attitude.
But that's exactly what Jamie *isn't* talking about. He never said anything about not designing the system, or doing the design ad-hoc, all he's saying is two things:
1) If your code is too complex, uses too many obscure language features, or has a structure that can't easily fit in the average person's head, it's likely to be more buggy since some of your team will never fully understand it. (Or, if they do now, future maintainers may not.) Basically, the coding equivalent to Keep It Simple, Stupid.
2) The number one feature of any application is "it shipped." It doesn't matter how great your program is if it's vaporware.
Neither of those two points have anything at all to do with this bug.
The word "duct-tape" leads people to think that the philosophy has something to do with coding by the seat of your pants. "Oh this function isn't designed right, I'll just put a couple globals in this file to get the right params" or something like that. Not only is that not in the interview with Jamie, but even Joel's article doesn't say anything like that.
When you choose a name like "duct-tape programmer" you're basically guaranteeing that people are going to misread the article, as I believe you have. Anyway, best to ignore that particular work of Joel's and go straight to the interview with Jamie in the first place, if you want the real story.
This particular bug is simply a case of misreading a confusing spec in a subtle, and nobody catching it for years. That could happen regardless of your method or philosophy. Anybody coming into this and saying "oh unit tests would have nailed this!" or "oh that would never happen with Scrum!" is just cheerleading their favorite concept.
In Jamie's defense, I've read that book, and Joel's interpretation of what he said is completely, totally, 100% off-base. Plus the name "duct-tape programmer" is offensive. Usually, I'm a fan of Joel. But then again, usually he's not so wrong and offensive in his articles.
(The sad thing is that I agree with the general principle of the article, but the way it's presented, and the way it's attributed to Jamie, is completely off-base.)
MacInTalk (or whatever they call it now) has been in Mac OS since day one in 1984. One of the famous demos involved the original Mac "introducing itself" using it.
Now, I think, every OS has that support. Not sure if Windows has a CLI command for it, but it wouldn't be tough to write a quick VBScript or something to provide one, if you really had a need.
Laws that allow absolute control over any derivative works are a good way to strangle creativity and innovation.
But the obvious point that you're missing is that this is not creative, nor is it innovative.
Creative would have been coming up with their own universe to tell a story in. Innovative would be doing something on film that has never been done before. This is neither.
Look, commercial or not, there's nothing creative going on here, there's nothing innovative going on here, and the movie's producers are retarded for not asking permission *before* they expended so much time and effort on the project. I have zero sympathy.
I get what your saying but...c'mon. Artists shouldn't have to ask permission to do their work.
They're not doing THEIR work, they're adapting SOMEONE ELSE's work. And it's not like Nintendo is abusing a copyright that should have long-since expired by now, either... they're perfectly within their legal and moral right in this case.
If they wanted to make a fantasy movie, and more power to them, they could have made an *original* one, making it an original work. Then I might be able to respect the film.
The only reason they did a Zelda adaptation in the first place is to cash-in on the name recognition. Cha-ching.
For some reason, Slashdot and Slashdotters LOVE to go on and on and on about how ARM computers are going to save us from Windows/Intel tyranny. It's complete delusion.
Ah yes, the obligatory "the US is just as bad!" response. Thanks for filling this vital role of expanding the level of bullshit on the Internet, StreetStealth.
Just pointing out that XBLA existed on the original Xbox too, although it didn't really take off until the Xbox 360 came around.
Also, the original Xbox had a HD and network adapter as standard equipment. Frankly, I think it was a more innovative device than the Xbox 360-- the 360 is an evolution, but the Xbox was a leap forward.
That would be all good and fine is she were elected (or appointed by somebody who was elected.) But the fact that the office is HEREDITARY is what Americans object to.
Fundamental to our philosophy, all men are created equal. You don't *get* to be wealthy and important just because you're an ancestor of someone clever enough to convince the populace that God appointed them to lead.
If the queen were elected to that office, I don't think anybody would object or call to abolish the position.
Hum. I drive in Washington State, and people are pretty good about it. They get (understandably) confused for huge intersections, with 3 straight lanes and a separate left turn lane as to whose turn it is to go, but I mean, I've never seen anybody just barrel through without looking.
You've been around long enough to know how quickly FOSS software fixes faults. If you don't know the current state of the software, don't post crap about it.
Tell you what, I'll do that as soon as everybody who hasn't used Windows 7 stops posting about flaws in Windows XP.
Besides, in my fucking post, I already SAID it had been a few years. What do you want next time? Should I surround that by asterisks? Or maybe bold and italicize it? Here: ***** I HAVE NOT USED OPEN OFFICE IN A FEW YEARS ***** . Happy?
The problem is they continually flip flop, one week they are seeking open source interaction and the next week they are attacking it and it's supporters.
The only evidence that this position has anything to do with "attacking" OpenOffice is right here in the Slashdot summary. The job posting itself certainly doesn't suggest it.
Imagine Microsoft wanted to improve interoperability of ODF, they'd still need to fill positions like the posted one, right? Or imagine Microsoft actually wants to contribute to OO.org development, again, they'd need listings like this one for that. Why do you (and the summary writer) instantly assume Microsoft is hiring a person to sabotage or destroy the project?
There's no flip-flop, you're just giving *waaay* too much trust to Slashdot.
Oh don't worry about it, I get "Flamebait" if I post what I ate for breakfast. (Apple fritter and a vanilla latte, BTW.)
I've long since stopped caring about the moderation system, which is really the only way to use the site and retain some sense of sanity. Other than, I figure the more downmods you get, the closer you are to the truth.
(Although I will gripe for extremely blatant abuses. Like the post a week or so back where there were dozens of modded-up off-topic posts. My gripes are always modded down, natch.)
Tell that to the surviving members of Lisa Richter's family.
OH MY GOD! New technology killed one person! Let's go back to caves and hunt mammoths instead. (We'll have to clone the mammoths, but after the cloning, no more technology!!)
Christ. That line of thought is the reason we have to take off our shoes every time we fly, you know.
Here's an unpopular, but more realistic, idea: let's assign a dollar value to everybody's life and then we only change society/technology if the death value is greater than the savings. Insurance adjusters already do this every day, so we can put them in charge.
Dude, I told you it was a few years back. Maybe all the issues I had were fixed-- I don't fucking know, and I'm not going to take half my goddamned day going over every single point and trying to remember the exact sequence of keystrokes I used 3 fucking years ago to make a presentation. Seriously, WTF is up with your reply.
I'm not sure how you managed to have such a hard time with Impress. It (and Powerpoint) aren't particularly difficult apps to explore. Have you spent much time with it?
No I haven't, because I tried it and it sucked. Impress had its chance, and wasted it. Now that I've given it a chance, I'm not going to give it another one because my time's too valuable for that.
Except snow only fills the lights from one side. Maybe two if the wind shifts, but most likely just one... that means the light's working fine for 3 cars at the intersection, and you're the only one who thinks it's failed and should be treated like a 4-way stop. It's not like a power failure, where it's obvious to everybody what went wrong and what to do.
This isn't necessarily a problem, just a very different situation from the one you describe. I'm also guessing you live in an area with no snow.:P
Look at the paranoia present in nearly every story here on Slashdot. I think a better question would be, "why are engineers predisposed to paranoia?"
The terrorists are probably looking for that more than planning skills... from my experience, a lot of engineers are terrible at planning, at least planning anything that involves human beings.
Slashdot Mirror
It is just that I do also think the type of error the 2016 bug is can indeed be attributed to the "duct tape programming" attitude.
But that's exactly what Jamie *isn't* talking about. He never said anything about not designing the system, or doing the design ad-hoc, all he's saying is two things:
1) If your code is too complex, uses too many obscure language features, or has a structure that can't easily fit in the average person's head, it's likely to be more buggy since some of your team will never fully understand it. (Or, if they do now, future maintainers may not.) Basically, the coding equivalent to Keep It Simple, Stupid.
2) The number one feature of any application is "it shipped." It doesn't matter how great your program is if it's vaporware.
Neither of those two points have anything at all to do with this bug.
The word "duct-tape" leads people to think that the philosophy has something to do with coding by the seat of your pants. "Oh this function isn't designed right, I'll just put a couple globals in this file to get the right params" or something like that. Not only is that not in the interview with Jamie, but even Joel's article doesn't say anything like that.
When you choose a name like "duct-tape programmer" you're basically guaranteeing that people are going to misread the article, as I believe you have. Anyway, best to ignore that particular work of Joel's and go straight to the interview with Jamie in the first place, if you want the real story.
This particular bug is simply a case of misreading a confusing spec in a subtle, and nobody catching it for years. That could happen regardless of your method or philosophy. Anybody coming into this and saying "oh unit tests would have nailed this!" or "oh that would never happen with Scrum!" is just cheerleading their favorite concept.
In Jamie's defense, I've read that book, and Joel's interpretation of what he said is completely, totally, 100% off-base. Plus the name "duct-tape programmer" is offensive. Usually, I'm a fan of Joel. But then again, usually he's not so wrong and offensive in his articles.
(The sad thing is that I agree with the general principle of the article, but the way it's presented, and the way it's attributed to Jamie, is completely off-base.)
MacInTalk (or whatever they call it now) has been in Mac OS since day one in 1984. One of the famous demos involved the original Mac "introducing itself" using it.
Now, I think, every OS has that support. Not sure if Windows has a CLI command for it, but it wouldn't be tough to write a quick VBScript or something to provide one, if you really had a need.
Laws that allow absolute control over any derivative works are a good way to strangle creativity and innovation.
But the obvious point that you're missing is that this is not creative, nor is it innovative.
Creative would have been coming up with their own universe to tell a story in. Innovative would be doing something on film that has never been done before. This is neither.
Look, commercial or not, there's nothing creative going on here, there's nothing innovative going on here, and the movie's producers are retarded for not asking permission *before* they expended so much time and effort on the project. I have zero sympathy.
Um, the film's producers wanted to create a tribute to the popular LoZ series, not just any fantasy movie.
Then WHY DIDN'T THEY ASK PERMISSION FIRST!? Christ, are they retarded? What did they think was going to happen, exactly?
I have no idea why you're expecting sympathy for something like this.
Double-U Tee Eff.
You should return it as being defective, since it is. I haven't seen anything like that in Windows in a solid decade, and I'm not exaggerating.
I get what your saying but...c'mon. Artists shouldn't have to ask permission to do their work.
They're not doing THEIR work, they're adapting SOMEONE ELSE's work. And it's not like Nintendo is abusing a copyright that should have long-since expired by now, either... they're perfectly within their legal and moral right in this case.
If they wanted to make a fantasy movie, and more power to them, they could have made an *original* one, making it an original work. Then I might be able to respect the film.
The only reason they did a Zelda adaptation in the first place is to cash-in on the name recognition. Cha-ching.
For some reason, Slashdot and Slashdotters LOVE to go on and on and on about how ARM computers are going to save us from Windows/Intel tyranny. It's complete delusion.
People who have to make do with broken device drivers that come out of sleep with no sound or (worse) no video.
Linux, yes. My HP tablet PC wouldn't wake correctly just last year when I put Linux on it.
But have you seen it in Windows in the last 5 years? Hell, 10 years? Seriously?
Ah yes, the obligatory "the US is just as bad!" response. Thanks for filling this vital role of expanding the level of bullshit on the Internet, StreetStealth.
Just pointing out that XBLA existed on the original Xbox too, although it didn't really take off until the Xbox 360 came around.
Also, the original Xbox had a HD and network adapter as standard equipment. Frankly, I think it was a more innovative device than the Xbox 360-- the 360 is an evolution, but the Xbox was a leap forward.
That would be all good and fine is she were elected (or appointed by somebody who was elected.) But the fact that the office is HEREDITARY is what Americans object to.
Fundamental to our philosophy, all men are created equal. You don't *get* to be wealthy and important just because you're an ancestor of someone clever enough to convince the populace that God appointed them to lead.
If the queen were elected to that office, I don't think anybody would object or call to abolish the position.
OMG I was thinking of the wrong post.
WRONG? ON THE INTERNETS!?? You better crucify me POST-HASTE!
I guess this alters reality itself, making OpenOffice Impress BY DEFINITION the best presentation software evar.
I live in the best place in the world! Vancouver Canada.
--
There's an old robot saying that applies here:
DOES NOT COMPUTE
Wow, that's the perfect combination of post and sig. Congratulations.
Hum. I drive in Washington State, and people are pretty good about it. They get (understandably) confused for huge intersections, with 3 straight lanes and a separate left turn lane as to whose turn it is to go, but I mean, I've never seen anybody just barrel through without looking.
You've been around long enough to know how quickly FOSS software fixes faults. If you don't know the current state of the software, don't post crap about it.
Tell you what, I'll do that as soon as everybody who hasn't used Windows 7 stops posting about flaws in Windows XP.
Besides, in my fucking post, I already SAID it had been a few years. What do you want next time? Should I surround that by asterisks? Or maybe bold and italicize it? Here: ***** I HAVE NOT USED OPEN OFFICE IN A FEW YEARS ***** . Happy?
The problem is they continually flip flop, one week they are seeking open source interaction and the next week they are attacking it and it's supporters.
The only evidence that this position has anything to do with "attacking" OpenOffice is right here in the Slashdot summary. The job posting itself certainly doesn't suggest it.
Imagine Microsoft wanted to improve interoperability of ODF, they'd still need to fill positions like the posted one, right? Or imagine Microsoft actually wants to contribute to OO.org development, again, they'd need listings like this one for that. Why do you (and the summary writer) instantly assume Microsoft is hiring a person to sabotage or destroy the project?
There's no flip-flop, you're just giving *waaay* too much trust to Slashdot.
No, really! It's made by the same company that made this revolutionary new locomotive design:
http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/LOCOLOCO/holman/holman.htm
The difference is it mentions this and asks you if you want to do it where
Wrong. It installs it by default in Windows.
where as MS Office just shoves some bit into your startup folder.
Wrong. MS Office is just built to take advantage of existing Windows DLL caching features.
Oh don't worry about it, I get "Flamebait" if I post what I ate for breakfast. (Apple fritter and a vanilla latte, BTW.)
I've long since stopped caring about the moderation system, which is really the only way to use the site and retain some sense of sanity. Other than, I figure the more downmods you get, the closer you are to the truth.
(Although I will gripe for extremely blatant abuses. Like the post a week or so back where there were dozens of modded-up off-topic posts. My gripes are always modded down, natch.)
Tell that to the surviving members of Lisa Richter's family.
OH MY GOD! New technology killed one person! Let's go back to caves and hunt mammoths instead. (We'll have to clone the mammoths, but after the cloning, no more technology!!)
Christ. That line of thought is the reason we have to take off our shoes every time we fly, you know.
Here's an unpopular, but more realistic, idea: let's assign a dollar value to everybody's life and then we only change society/technology if the death value is greater than the savings. Insurance adjusters already do this every day, so we can put them in charge.
Dude, I told you it was a few years back. Maybe all the issues I had were fixed-- I don't fucking know, and I'm not going to take half my goddamned day going over every single point and trying to remember the exact sequence of keystrokes I used 3 fucking years ago to make a presentation. Seriously, WTF is up with your reply.
I'm not sure how you managed to have such a hard time with Impress. It (and Powerpoint) aren't particularly difficult apps to explore. Have you spent much time with it?
No I haven't, because I tried it and it sucked. Impress had its chance, and wasted it. Now that I've given it a chance, I'm not going to give it another one because my time's too valuable for that.
Plus only retard cities mount lights horizontally. Oh yeah, I went there!
Except snow only fills the lights from one side. Maybe two if the wind shifts, but most likely just one... that means the light's working fine for 3 cars at the intersection, and you're the only one who thinks it's failed and should be treated like a 4-way stop. It's not like a power failure, where it's obvious to everybody what went wrong and what to do.
This isn't necessarily a problem, just a very different situation from the one you describe. I'm also guessing you live in an area with no snow. :P
Look at the paranoia present in nearly every story here on Slashdot. I think a better question would be, "why are engineers predisposed to paranoia?"
The terrorists are probably looking for that more than planning skills... from my experience, a lot of engineers are terrible at planning, at least planning anything that involves human beings.