• 15 Posts
  • 304 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle



  • Presentation/Lecture; bad software quality due to software stack complexity with increased separation of layers and participants

    SoC (System on a Chip) hardware for embedded/smaller use cases is very common and successful.

    Suggests “Direct Coding” with direct hardware access as a possible alternative approach to PC hardware interfacing. Implementing that is more about commitment than difficulty. Depends more on hardware producers than software developers. A lack of drivers could give a fairer playing field between manufacturers.



  • Seems like a Ruby issue and suggested improvement? Using keyword arguments does feel like introducing a type of typing.

    In C# I use records for simple, naturally behaving types, I can define explicit and implicit cast operators, so I have to choice between requiring explicit casts or not (because they make sense to require or are not necessary). I can use var to define a variable without specifying a type, and it is deducted from what it gets assigned - but is still that specific type and gives me type safety.

    In Rust, as far as I understand anyway, traits define shared behavior. In Go interface implementations are implicit rather than explicit. With these, there’s even less of a need of elaborate explicit typing like the post argues/gives an example of.


    In general, I’ve never had considerable effort or annoyance implementing or using typing. And I know what it’s good for; explicitness, and in consequence, predictability, certainty, increased maintainability, and reduced issues and confusions. If following references or refactoring becomes unpredictable or high effort, it’d be quite annoying.

    When I’m coding JavaScript adding JSDoc so the typing information gets passed along is quite cumbersome. Without it, the IDE does not give intellisense/auto-completion or argument type matching. JavaScript is better with it, I consider it worth it with IDE support, but it is quite cumbersome. (I try to evade TypeScript compiler/tooling overhead.)

    A programming language can offer extensive auto-deduction while using strong typing. With appropriate conversions in place, it will only report conflicts and where it was intended to.


    I’m thinking of where I enjoyed dynamic natures, which I certainly have. But I don’t think that’s a matter of typing. It’s a matter of programming language interfacing to typing. If in PHP or JS I make a change, hit F5, and get an error, that’s not any better than the IDE already showing it beforehand. And for the most part, I can program the same way with or without typing.

    Man, this became a long text.












  • Kissaki@programming.devtoGit@programming.devGit Commit Creation
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Given that it is high level, I assume you did not want to include this. I’ll mention it here in a comment either way. Text form in the commit message.

    I really like using conventional commit messages and introduced it in my projects. We defined a few types, and more leniently choose optional scopes. It’s very useful for categorizing and skimming through commit lists, and for generating changelogs/release notes. `fix(account): Use correct hasing xy"

    Consistent imperative form is important to me too. The commit message examples talks about “Summary of changes”, which has no verb, and so, may mislead to a different undesirable form of summarizing changes. (“Change xy” instead of “changed xy” or “[now] does xy [at runtime]” or “did z”.)

    I didn’t fully read it, only skimmed, so excuse me if I missed mentions of the commit message text form. It seems very elaborate otherwise.






  • Python’s major pro is its simple, straightforward syntax, which excels at data handling. This has made it popular with novices of all shades […]

    For first-timer coders, Python is easier to learn, understand, and adapt than many low-level programming languages […]

    Is python being easy to learn actually true? I can see it being easier than low-level programming. But there’s other alternatives like C# and Java that certainly seem much better and easier to me. Especially when you consider the ecosystem around only writing code.

    Plus, the Python language is a steadfast feature in the desktop Linux software landscape. It’s preinstalled on most Linux distributions, boasts extensive library support, and can be used to fashion very cool (as well as very basic) Qt, GTK, and other toolkit UIs.

    It’s certainly available, and more readily available on Linux. The whole v2 v3 mess was lackluster. But I guess preinstalled is convenient, and more accessible than installable Java or whatever.

    I’ve never seen JavaScript or Python popularity as evidence or correlating with actual qualities. More with a self-promoting usage. Python was being used in science, then in AI, then AI became popular. To me, it seems like a natural propagation consequence more than simplicity or features over other frameworks and languages.