|
Don't misunderstand me, I like Lisp (yes, I'm a bit weird).
Using it with Autocad was ok but when the boss came around, telling that we should use Visual Lisp for our windows port of our DOS-application (written in Turbo Pascal, working with "Big Data" before it was named) ... I politely informed him that it would never happen.
|
|
|
|
|
I have made several attempts to learn Lisp - I have a few mathematically inclined colleagues who are in love with the language (even though we do not at all use it a work). I understand that it is fascinating as a Turing machine language: Super simple, and given that you can handle an infinite string of paretheses, it can be used to solve any NP complete problem in linear time (or at least close to that).
My problem was my Lisp book... The Bible of Lisp philoosphy and thinking: The Anatomy of Lisp. My copy is typeset in a pre-release of Tex/Metafont. Typograhical quality was terrible. The characters are swimming before me; I am unable to focus on them. I know that the text lines are straight, yet to me, a page looks like a boxful of snakes certainly does not lay still.
It is a pity that the typography of a textbook can ruin a learning experience totally. Of course I should have picked up an alternative textbook - I did, too, but it was no good, so I returned to Anatomy and got seasick once more... That was many years ago, when I still had surplus energy to learn a language just for the learning. Now I know that I will never use Lisp for anything "useful", so whatever I've got left of energy goes into other projects.
|
|
|
|
|
Registry parser in VB6 was the first time (mid 90s) - requested by the development manager
Lotus Notes - took one look under the hood and refused the contract.
Delphi - we had built one app using delphi and performance was terrible, probably our fault but we could not identify the problem so did not persist with the language and refused the contract. I liked turbo pascal.
Excel - every time some pillock requests a database operation built in excel, f***ing power user bankers!
Currently the entire Web stack!
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes wrote: Currently the entire Web stack!
How can that be? It's what every dork ever dreamed of. Weak typing, no object orientation and no pesky compilers. Everything has become sooooooo easy and exciting, just like in the days of C64 BASIC, and just about as fast. 
|
|
|
|
|
I was asked to develop a database in my first Job as a programmer in Access and the requirements were not able to be met by using access, explained this to my then boss who tried to say its all possible by using the wizard.
It took me a while to show him why but he finally understood and allowed me at the time to use VB6.
Every day, thousands of innocent plants are killed by vegetarians.
Help end the violence EAT BACON
|
|
|
|
|
VB6 actually sounds like heaven to me ... Excel and Access available in my current role (only) 
|
|
|
|
|
are you an accountant?
I do not fear of failure. I fear of giving up out of frustration.
|
|
|
|
|
 No ... but the boss is
|
|
|
|
|
I've never refused to write code in any language.
When I don't know the language I mention that and I'll have to learn it, which may not be worth the trouble for the work that needs to be done, but I won't refuse it.
I've bashed plenty of languages because it's fun to piss people off (like we have a Java enthusiast at the office, can you believe that guy?  )
And I've a clear preference for C#, although I've started liking JavaScript as well (planning to get into TypeScript).
There are some technologies I really dislike, Crystal Reports comes to mind, I'm not a fan of Oracle, and after having tried Angular I can add Knockout to the list.
But it's my job to provide services and if my employer or client needs me to use Crystal Reports then so it shall be.
I may propose an alternative, but that's about it.
Refusing to write in a certain language because you just don't like the language smells like arrogant elitism to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: smells like arrogant elitism to me.
Well - let's consider:
A whore observes a leper's finger fall off. She refuses his employment offer.
Does that make her an elitist?
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
That's refusing a customer or project, not a specific language.
C# is my favorite language, but there are C# projects I'd rather not work on.
I don't think I know of any (widely used) languages that compare to a leper (although I know of a lot of projects that are written like lepers).
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent!
I do not fear of failure. I fear of giving up out of frustration.
|
|
|
|
|
There really has to be a good reason that you would have to write something in a different language; it has to have a useful and functional purpose. Refusing to do most things for your employer, will get you fired, or at least put on the sh*t list.
|
|
|
|
|
Slacker007 wrote: There really has to be a good reason that you would have to write something in a different language; it has to have a useful and functional purpose.
Exactly, and if there isn't I'd advice against it.
But at the end of the day it's not my call to make, so if my employer decides to use VB instead of C# from now on I'll be coding VB tomorrow (although I'd advice against it, perhaps even put up a bit of a fight ).
|
|
|
|
|
Well stated.
I might decline a contract if my initial impression was that the project was likely to be a failure, and we'd certainly discuss any issues with language. But the real issue would not be the language, it would be something else. I've been on one project that failed due to technology -- every other failure was business related.
People complain about VB, PHP, Javascript, etc. <shrug> I do what I'm paid to do, and if I meet my contractual obligations and the client is satisfied, I succeeded.
|
|
|
|
|
I started out in VB and I'm doing C# now.
I've seen horror in both.
But I can certainly write good code in both as well!
But, I'll have to admit it, VB makes it a bit easier to write bad code 
For example, probably the worst code I've seen was JavaScript because JavaScript makes all those hard to read and hard to debug constructs possible (like a huuuuuge function with deep if-else branches that returns a different type based on input  and I had to use it ).
|
|
|
|
|
Not language, but WCF s*cks most of the times.
modified 17-Jul-17 18:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
bindings...bindings...binding configurations
|
|
|
|
|
NS_DOTNET wrote: Not language, but WCF s*cks most of the times.
Most of the time? 
Marc
Latest Article - Create a Dockerized Python Fiddle Web App
Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny
Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
|
|
|
|
|
whenever someone says "WCF"
thoughts come about
Address
Binding
Contract
and then I just move out to get some fresh air,
feels like all oxygen in the office is consumed
|
|
|
|
|
... I was once asked to write code for a tiny micro controller in C.
My reasoning for using assembler instead was accepted.
|
|
|
|
|
C on a small processor is not very efficient. Every 8 bit processor with only a few k memory is very quickly bogged down by subroutine calling conventions and managing the heap memory.
|
|
|
|
|
That was one of the arguments.
The main argument for C was that writing the code would take less time. But I argued that I know assembly for that device very well and that I already had a lot of existing (and therefore tested) routines which can be reused and must not be reimplemented (and tested) in C.
|
|
|
|
|
Even the typical 16 bit processors, like the MC68k already were fast enough and had enough memory to justify the use of a compiler. C never was made for 8 bit CPUs, so probably assembly or even machine code may have been the better choice.
|
|
|
|
|
I have written a ton of 8051 code in C and assembler. Keil pretty much killed the C verses Assembly issue for me.
When I first started using 8051 C in the 90's I often examined the assembly output of the compiler looking to see if I could improve on it. I found very little that I wanted to change. This was for a device measuring strain-gage bridge inputs at 20 bit precision, driving an LCD display and outputting data via USB HID Device class messaging (not a virtual UART over USB). Except for the startup code provided by the compiler, the only legacy assembly code that remained was the FIR filters. I honestly think we could have moved that to C as well, but it worked and never needed maintenance so why bother.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
