|
Hardest part is picking best suitable technology
Bummer!!
we learn technology X 
we work on it for few days/months, spending lot of time going through docs, samples & practicing, sometimes getting stuck
and later while finding solution of problem in X discovering that alternate better technology Y exists 
=====================================================
The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence
|
|
|
|
|
...at all the weird sh^t that some button-clicking, icon dragging moron thinks is a good interface with NO HOT KEYS for anything!
...and other reasons that I won't mention as I just get too angry to type!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
Honestly, it is my biggest fear.
We have millions of lines of Delphi code for many clients.
Luckily it is is still supported, and it is Pascal based.
But we have showed consistently that we suffered LESS than similar VS projects.
After joining a company we found that more than HALF of the VS projects would not build on the new versions of VS. (Think VB days). So customers come back in 3 years and want a simple change or two, and are faced with major upgrades, or complete rewrites.
We stopped using a paid project that was based on silverlight, because as it was rewritten to NOT use it, the entire interface was much harder to use, and it was taking them far longer with more growing pains than they imagined.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yup
The best way to improve Windows is run it on a Mac.
The best way to bring a Mac to its knees is to run Windows on it.
~ my brother Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
As an ex-Navy Nuc, learning new stuff, and becoming reasonably proficient, is never hard. The hard part is convincing the non-engineering folks in management to greenlight a project using the new technology. Even with the combination of my business background and my technology background, making the case, though easy enough from an objective perspective, becomes quite difficult when getting management to allow the use of resources.
|
|
|
|
|
I had a friend who told me he was going to these classes, where he was going to learn C/C++, Java, VB, SQL and etc., all in 1 year.
He didn't understand why I busted out laughing. 
INTP
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence." - Edsger Dijkstra
"I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks. " - Daniel Boone
modified 19-Mar-19 11:56am.
|
|
|
|
|
|
When I need to learn something new, it's typically for a project that is in motion. But the schedule doesn't allow for the hard fact that all or most of the team has to learn something new, become instantly proficient, and still meet the original schedule (which may be complete fantasy).
Most employers want their people to spend personal time learning the new tech. I used to do it, but eventually realized that if the employer wants me to do something for them, then it is up to them to pay for it.
|
|
|
|
|
Nine out of ten "new technologies" are really Same Sh*t, New Wrapper. Or: The way we always did things, we just didn't formalize it into a "new technology". Then comes these evangelists demanding new terminology, new documentation, changes in the environment to suit their prferences - and it really makes nothing.
OK ... Sometimes it really is new. Like this "smart fork" that makes your mobile buzz in your pocket if you rise the fork to your mouth too frequently: "You should eat slower!" ... To me, at least half of the "smart" technologies raise a question in me: Who the h*** would want something like that?
I am not just talking about the technology provided to end users; it is the same with the development technologies we use: All the time when someone brings up a "new" way of doing the work, I ask "Why would I want to do it that way? What's the point of it?"
Sometimes, the "new" thing is old - but it was discarded before today's young evangelists had their education. Sometimes, the syntactical wrapper is new. Sometimes its only plus is the newness, it has no other value. In 95% of the cases, introducing a technology as "new" is a weapon used in turf wars: You must discard all the alternatives that those others promote, and do it the way we tell you to do it, in our ways! Whether the "new" part is in buzzwords and syntax, or in minor semantic changes (that could very well have been made as a modification to the old technology), the essential thing is not to gain any essential improvement, but to gain control, and the initiative.
Looking through the fog to determine the real value of the new technology is the hardest part.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Being the new design pattern, a new programming language or anything, you need to have enough time to learn it.
I want to explore Flutter and check it whether it is as good as they say. But, in order to explore it, I need to be able to know how Dart works... And there goes the craze. I would then, that means, need to explore Dart language first, understand how it works, and then come back to Flutter. By then I would have lost most of the interest in this new tool.
This is kind of like a problem.
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
Wrapping my head around it is part of how I learn - and when (if ?) it's accomplished I progress very rapidly - but it takes time.
The "Other", however, has to do with those who are describing/teaching the new technology. All too often, they use jargon that makes sense only if you already knew about it - and if that was the case, I wouldn't looking at their stuff.
A case in point - the concept in C++ about classes and objects. Sure, makes sense now - but at the time I first tried to got to it from C (out of necessity) it was just so much jargon and gibberish. Adding to the confusion was, at least in this case, that one had native and 'managed' versions of the types was used to and the hitherto need for namespaces.
Yeah - it all falls into place rapidly enough - but only when it starts to fall into place.
| 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 |
|
|
|
|
|
Learning this week's new thing before it becomes next week's old thing.
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. - Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
Most of suppliers of Hard- and Software down know how create a ducumentation which helps or make sense.
Most of time the needed information is fragmented over severall (dozend) of pages.
|
|
|
|
|
If you hadn't brought this up, I would have! 
More often than not, the documentation available is totally insufficient and you waste a lot of time just trying to find out how the damn thing works! 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
Never argue with a fool. Onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.
Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
There is documentation?
I spent all that time studying the code for nothing! (wrong)
Each project had an BR, FD and TD. While were at it, there might be an AD.
But that documentation is for a particular project. The people on the next project do not even know it exist, let alone have access rights to it. And, after 20 years, there are only the 1 or 2 employees, that still work on it full time and actually know what it does (kind of).
Next wave - they are going agile with contractors - months later it does not work - please help.
Q1) What documentation do you have?
A1) None.
Q2) What is it supposed to be doing?
A2) ..., ok - got it
10 days later - here you go, all done.
P.S. I am also a contractor - I was just here a year longer than them. 
INTP
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence." - Edsger Dijkstra
"I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks. " - Daniel Boone
|
|
|
|
|
I've seen queues being used as some sort of multi-threading code.
Databases as queues.
Azure web slots as a substitute for DTAP.
We all know that programmer who learns something new and now that's the new solution for all the problems.
When learning a new technology we read "technology X makes Y and Z even easier!", but we rarely read "absolutely don't do A, B and C."
And if you do it wrong you'll often know it in a few years or so, when the software isn't so small anymore 
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: I've seen queues being used as some sort of multi-threading code. Databases as queues.
Are you always so dramatic? Some other guy from Amsterdam once said this:
Quote: I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time like tears in rain. [Pause] Time to die.
Back to the topic: I don't care what something was designed for. It's far more interesting to know what it actually can do. That's why I always stray off the official path and do my own thing. 'Standards' and 'conventions' are only crutches for those who can't walk without them.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
A database as a queue is not the end of the world, but there are better alternatives like... Well, I don't know, a queue?
If you need multi-threading, start up a new thread, don't put something on a queue, read it from another thread, and process it, that's madness.
It might make sense to you NOW, but will it make sense to the people that come after you?
Is it maintainable in the long term (or even in the short term)?
Just because you have a hammer doesn't mean every problem is a nail.
Maybe a better example, at my previous job they wanted to use Docker to deploy some front-end applications to customers who each got their own VM.
Docker isn't for front-end applications... It's possible, but it's hard, you need to do quite a bit of work and it isn't supported by Docker even when you get it working.
It also makes little sense when you give each customer their own custom VM with their own custom Docker container.
Someone read about Docker and thought of a wrong use case.
Some people then see the error of their ways and find a better alternative (like, in this example, DSC or some such), others push and press on until the solution fits the problem.
In this particular case I didn't stick out long enough to see what they did 
|
|
|
|
|
Here Here! 
INTP
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence." - Edsger Dijkstra
"I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks. " - Daniel Boone
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: I've seen queues being used as some sort of multi-threading code.
I once knew a girl named Linda, but I haven't seen her around for a while.
|
|
|
|
|
Trying to find a good reason to do that.
|
|
|
|
|
GKP1992 wrote: Trying to find a good reason NOT to do that
There you go.
You have just been Sharapova'd.
|
|
|
|
|
But isn't that pretty easy? 
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
