Elderos @ Elderos @lemmings.world

Posts

0

Comments

290

Joined

2 yr. ago

Who is "they"? Not all game companies can afford to support multiple platforms. You're not entitled for developers to support your preferred platform nor does it make sense yo give a negative review unless they lied in the product description.

He is so transparent. Only people who cheat themselves are usually this paranoid about other people doing it. It is also true for thieves and a bunch of other stuff.

Every time he talks about this it is clear as day that he thinks they over-cheated him. He just can't outright say it, but this pisses him so much. So instead it comes off as heavily insinuating that the only way to get numbers like he did is to cheat.

Yes, and the test suites were insane. The program was outputting a lot of data, and we basically asserted on anything and everything for any given integration. I mentioned that testing wasn't the only issue, well there was a lot of issues. Unfortunately the behaviour changes were requested by the stakeholders and there was no way around it. That being said, had this thing we maintained been properly developed those changes would have been a breeze imo. The actual requirements were very simple.

But anyway, I realize this is maybe an extreme example to paint integration tests negatively, but the point remain. In this scenario, every time we changed a bit of code it broke dozens of integration tests instead of breaking just a relevant integration test, had everything that could have been unit tested been written that way. The integration tests could probably also had been less... exhaustive, but it was probably for the best considering the codebase.

The pandemic made everything worse, but students struggled with math as long as I have been alive. As someone who loved science and math stuff outside school, but hated it with a passion in school, this text really put my thoughts into words as to why :

Lockhart's Lament: https://maa.org/sites/default/files/pdf/devlin/LockhartsLament.pdf

TLDR: It is taught wrong.

Makes a lot of sense. I figure contract tests is more or less what I have been doing then.

I think there is that misconception that unit tests are about validating each line of code and preventing logic bugs. Though obviously you understand that this isn't just about that, or not at all about that I would argue. Unit tests won't prevent accidental breaking changes, but you can at least add new tests every time this happen, so you're at least guaranteed that the next maintainer won't be doing the same mistake.

In an ideal world we could probably have nothing but integration tests, but in my experience if you only do integration testing you end up working really hard maintaining tests that are prone to break and costly to run. Unit tests are cheap to code and cheap to run, it is a great place to enforce your "contracts" with tests that are theoretically immutable. After those tests are out of the way, you can focus only on the actual interaction between your systems with the more expensive tests.

Anyway, you have a good take I am just blabbering. This is based on my personal experience as someone who only cared integration tests but was later converted by a person much smarter than I am. And then later on by joining a team that exclusively did integration testing, hundred of tests. It was hell (imo), we had to change dozens of tests for every little bit of modification. The rest of the team seemed fine with it though. We rarely shipped bugs but progress was incredibly slow for a module of such low complexity. Testing wasn't the only issue with that codebase though.

Oh, very interesting! I bookmarked it thanks for sharing!

It seems to be a rare talent indeed.

I am a programmer so my own approach is to find whatever similar project had to solve the same UUx requirements, either by searching the web or from memory, and to start iterating on that. Fortunately it is pretty uncommon to have to reinvent the wheel.

Well, most of the UX designer I have worked with don't do that, and most didn't seem to have that much experience using softwares. I have seen some weird shit in meetings, as the "non-expert" it can be very delicate to call those bad designs repeatedly. Even basic rules like when to use radio buttons vs checkboxes are sometime broken. All people working 6 figure jobs++.

I guess I have spent too much time on the computer over the last 2 decades and played around with too many interfaces to ever be satisfied with much of anything.

This is part of their plan to become 50th in some of those disciplines.

The best codebase I have ever seen and collaborated on was also boring as fuck.

• Small, immutable modules.
• Every new features was coded by extension (the 'o' in S.O.L.I.D)
• All dependencies were resolved by injection.
• All the application life cycle was managed by configurable scopes.
• There was absolutely no boiler plate except for the initial injectors.
• All of the tests were brain-dead and took very minimal effort to write. Tests served both as documentation and specification for modules.
• "Refactoring" was as simple as changing a constructor or a configuration file.
• All the input/output of the modules were configurable streams.

There is more to it, but basically, it was a very strict codebase, and it used a lot of opinionated libraries. Not an easy codebase to understand if you're a newbie, but it was absolutely brain dead to maintain and extend on.

Coding actually took very little time of our day, most of it consisted of researching the best tech or what to add next. I think the codebase was objectively strictly better than all other similar software I've seen and worked on. We joked A LOT when it came time to change something in the app pretending it would take weeks and many 8 pointers, then we'd casually make the change while joking about it.

It might sound mythical and bullshity, and it wasn't perfect, it should be said that dependency injection often come in the form of highly opinionated frameworks, but it really felt like what software development should be. It really felt like engineering, boring and predictable, every PO dreams.

That being said, I given up trying to convince people that having life-cycle logic are over the place and fetching dependencies left and right always lead to chaos. Unfortunately I cannot really tell you guys what the software was about because I am not allowed to, but there was a lot of moving parts (hence why we decided to go with this approach). I will also reiterate that it was boring as fuck. If anything, my hot take would be that most programmers are subconsciously lying to themselves, and prefer to code whatever it is they like, instead of what the codebase need, and using whatever tool they like, instead of the tools the project and the team need. Programming like and engineer is not "fun", programming like a cowboy and ignoring the tests is a whole lot of fun.

I think unit testing is good at enforcing a spec so other developers know what to expect from your module and how to maintain it. It also kinda force you to dogfood your own stuff. I see a lot of hot takes about unit tests (its okay, this is why we're here), but I am a bit curious how many people here worked in big chaotic software companies before and not just hobby project or small teams.

Imo it is strictly something you do when you write something like a library or any sort of module that you expect other developers to interact with. I've seen teams get all smug about code coverage as if this made them diligent. My personal experience is that developers who understand why unit tests are important tend to write better code than those who skip them or do it "just because".

and by the parents. At this point teaching signs of manipulative behavior and logic 101 like recognizing fallacies would be considered liberal endoctrination by the cultists.

Wasn't he outed by hos niece or something. Could be someone else, but I remember reading he was pretty casually dropping all the race slurs at the dinner table.

Dude is racist AF, it is not that hard to figure out just by the surnames he gives people.

After 10 years working in offices, the last 3 being mostly remote, I hate to say it because I am lazy and it makes no sense to commute 2hours a day to go into an overcrowded city, but being in a physical location beats remote if done right.

The problem is, it is rarely done right. Some workplaces also just happen to be filled with people I will never bond with.

I also fucking hate to have my calendar filled with meetings and useless 1:1. It is worst than it ever been. What could have been a quick chat at my desk is now a reserved 1h long meeting for which I have to prepare and stay glued at my webcam for.

I have a friend who absolutely love remote and webcams. He loves sitting still in front of the computer and making faces and everything. Well I am not like that. I like multitasking, talking to people while I work or moving around. I loved going out for dinner with the people I bonded with to talk about stuff.

Work in the office can be made to not feel like work, I experienced it in at least 1 place. Made me feel like I was hanging out with friends all day. Remote work will sort of always feel like work for me, even with the people I like it is sort of meh. Being on call is too intrusive and not being on call is too isolated. We're sort of missing the in-between. Anyway I could go on.

I always wished I could simply teleport into the building, because the commute has always been the worsy part of the day, by far.

Imo they picked him. He's like every mafia / kkk / nazi and etc ideal PR person. Just wrap it up in nationalism.

Trump telegraphied his move for months, even years. The whole thing about mail-in bailot, and how he wouldn't accept the result.

Well, turns out Trump has been calling virtually everything since he was born rigged. Seriously, there are 8 decades of history of Trump cheating and calling whatever it oa rigged. It blows my mind that this guy with a very transparent history gets to call the election rigged like it was his teenager beauty pageant and it could means the end of America.

Where the fuck do we go from here.

Yeah I have this particular alt-right website I visit every now and then due to my morbid curiosity. It is basically a mix of Q-stuff, Trump fans, pro-genocide folks and people who shouldn't be there but who are completely lost. They certainly think highly of themselves.

One thing I noticed, is that beside the conspiracy stuff for which the evidence is paper-thin and mostly made up of air, they don't say anything really. I mean it is all one-liner, posturing, saying how the left or the globalists are so bad, but they don't actually discuss in-depth of anything but those made up facts. Take our little conversion right here, we're trying really hard to understand them, you yourself shown empathy for them. Well, they don't speak like that over there. They don't try to understand "the left", they don't discuss facts or events outside the talking points except to agree on the conspiracy stuff. But man do they think that we're literal morons.

That's one thing I noticed with some people in real life. People with simple world views have very black and white answers. They feel very smart because they're pretty damn sure they solved whatever it is they believe. When they hear other people talk with nuance, cite allegories and abstract concepts they are completely at a lost. Often, their first instinct is to believe that we are completely stupid for talking nonsense. After all, it is all very simple right? It must be because we struggle to understand that we're having such strange discussions. Aaaannyway. It will get worst until it get better. The cure for ignorance is education, but a few generations have been lost already.

Makes sense.

I suppose it comes back to the allegory of the cave, though I really like the idea of them having an inverted Okham's Razor, because it helps to visualize on which side of the thought prison we are. Because, you know, Trump supporters would argue that we are the one missing the big picture.

It is flipping the complexity of the world upside down basically.

The world is a complex system made of many simple observable facts and events.

To them, the world is a simple system made of many overly convoluted and self-contradicting facts and events.

They still have to make sense of the world, so that complexity has to go somewhere. Every little thing has to be twisted and distorted to make sense of their simple world view. It is both intriguing and scary. It is the opposite of okham's razor really, because they use it to justify the simplicity of the world, but really they picked the most convoluted answer.

I think it is still pretty decent at "coding", but it used that I could throw almost anything at it about virtually anything and most of the time there was no hallucinations if the prompt was good. It has always been prone to beong influenced by biased prompts so you had.to work around that.

Lately I feel like I really need to draw out answers out of it. You have to insist to get past the cookie-cutter reponses and all the newly added "I am not a specialist therefore I refuse to answer". Historical questions are often refused too if deemed offensives. But really, its been unable to give me all sort of general facts like it used too by lying about the cutoff date of 2021, even after being corrected and apologizing. Some answers are purely 100% hallucinations. Its never been perfect but it used to be better than googling, well not anymore imo. It is still probably decent for non-historical questions, like coding.

Yeah they basically killed it. I knew for a fact that it was way too good to be given like that to us common folks. I mean it still has some use cases, but its ability to "reason" about stuff or at least the illusion of it is basically gone.