|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wSBC5Dyds8[^]
I don't get it.
Someone rips a load of other people's work and mixes it all together just shy of randomly, and I'm supposed to find it what?
a. Clever?
b. Enjoyable?
c. A waste of my time on talentless drivel?
Hmm.
I think I'll have to go with c.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
A robot choir producing unlistenable output.
|
|
|
|
|
Meh... Not even half as cool as Animusic[^]. And DELL Intell even did the real thing[^]! Now that's what I call mega über super cool 
My blog[ ^]
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
modified 17-Feb-15 2:22am.
|
|
|
|
|
Why DELL? It is Intel...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
It doesn't matter who it wss; it only takes 30 seconds of googling to find out that it's a fake, using a synthesiser, and in no way can be described as "the real thing".
It's just a large-scale version of one of those cheap, plastic trumpets or guitars for three-year-old kids. Really not something to be proud of.
But I'll bet the marketing department wet their pants with joy, at seeing such a bullsh1t machine.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
The real Animusic videos are pieces of art though. Keeping sound and video in sync like they do is nothing short of briliant 
The music sounds pretty good too (sure, it's digital, but who cares?) and the 'instruments' are pretty fantastic.
Not saying the phones aren't cool though.
I made the comparison because it's about digital music and keeping stuff in sync.
My blog[ ^]
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: Not even half as cool as Animusic[^]
That's a cartoon! Talk about comparing chalk and cheese!
Sander Rossel wrote: And DELL Intell even did the real thing[^]!
OK, so a big marketing department talked a big R&D department into building a machine.
BO-RING!
This is a bunch of telephones! No millions of (wasted) investment in custom-build, one-off technology; it's a bunch of phones like the one on your pocket, and a couple of developers to make it go!
You can tell that the whole thing was completely developer driven, because of the way the phones are laid out in a dull, dull, regular pattern with huge spaces between them. That would feel like the logical way to do it to some developers, but only appeal artistically to an accountant or a warehouse manager.
They should have borrowed a UX guy.
But I'd bet that a bunch of us from CP could do even better, just using our own phones and doing a few hours work -- no investment, no hiring or buying of manufacturing capacity; just the kit we carry with us every day.
That is where coolness is, not in the marketing departments of companies that can afford to waste millions on single-use junk!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
The phones are pretty cool, but it doesn't beat the cool graphics of Animusic with some algorithm to make sure sound and image are in sync (and it really is, including hits, sizes, tones, etc.!).
The Intell stuff is pretty cool (you know, because we can). Not half as cool as the real Animusic though
Mark_Wallace wrote: That's a cartoon! Talk about comparing chalk and cheese!
It's about making digital music and keeping it in sync. At least that's what it was for me 
My blog[ ^]
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
Regardless of whether it's real or fake, big budget or not, both videos look and sound pretty impressive.
My plan is to live forever ... so far so good
|
|
|
|
|
Very true!
My blog[ ^]
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
I'm doing a phone interview tomorrow with the lead tech guy and he, and I quote:
"wants to make sure that your strategies align more with Ruby best practices as opposed to a more traditionally .NET approach."
Now, what exactly does that mean? From my experience, Ruby developers have piss poor practices, but I really wonder Ruby brings to the table in terms of practices that are somehow different from "traditional" .NET approaches.
All I can think of is leveraging features like mixins that promote bad OO practices.
Anyone have a clue?
More generally, would you say that [Java / C / PHP / F# / etc.] has best practices that distinguish it from "traditional .NET" development?
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
They try to make things sound better by calling them "best" when they're not even good. 
|
|
|
|
|
Let me rephrase for you; "Once you do things my way you will be following best practices"
My plan is to live forever ... so far so good
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: They try to make things sound better by calling them "best" when they're not even good.
Yup. I've definitely encountered that in the Ruby camp.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Um... Testing... Testing...
Seriously. Many Ruby wallahs think that .NET guys don't do enough testing. That sounds like something someone would refer to as "best practices".
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Many Ruby wallahs think that .NET guys don't do enough testing.
I suspect that is it, but I can't help wondering what else he might mean. I think the first thing I will do is fire back the question "What is your perception of .NET practices?" Might lead to an interesting conversation, or at least a revealing one.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: "What is your perception of .NET practices? I mean, I've been places where I don't think they do enough testing, but most places aren't too bad."
As Lotrice will tell you, you've gotta get a good punch in first.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I can think of 3 points:
1. Using the strength of the language/environment (what is it for Ruby?)
2. Using common 'best-practices' - but why that should be different between Ruby and other languages?
3. The actual look-and-feel of your code - and I mean that your code is not write-only, and can be used in a group too...
In any way such a question would - in most cases at least - turn me hot...It sounds me like a 'tech' guy who didn't got over the slogans and buzzwords of the subject...
If you want the job, beware! Do not make him fool!
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: If you want the job, beware! Do not make him fool!
Very good advice.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote: 1. Using the strength of the language/environment (what is it for Ruby?)
2. Using common 'best-practices' - but why that should be different between Ruby and other languages?
Not sure. I could see someone objecting to trying to write C# like Java or vice versa; but C# and Ruby are different enough that I don't see how you could abuse one into looking like the other. 
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
I am guessing he is either:
- talking about building up classes using Ruby's strengths and understanding how to apply duck typing in the best ways, or
- talking out of his arse.
veni bibi saltavi
|
|
|
|
|
FYI, these posts ended up in the Moderation Queue and I passed them through.
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
Why? What? How?
veni bibi saltavi
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
