Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
User Journal

Journal Journal: and you're gonna like it, too

"Wimbledon.com uses cookies.
We use simple text files called cookies, saved on your computer, to help us deliver the best experience for you. Click continue to acknowledge that you are happy to receive cookies from Wimbledon.com."

Comment Re:WTF??? (Score 1) 8

"If so..."?

Yes, it was said by candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton during that night's Democrat's debate between candidates for their party's nomination to run next for the U.S. Presidency. I had recorded the debate from earlier, so was able to replay this part as necessary to get the quote exact.

Its significance to me (while only incidental to this JE) is that I've been saying here that the ACA, AKA "Obamacare", is indeed obviously a path to single-payer in the U.S., and that the American Left's expressed dissatisfaction with it was fake.

With that said however, this Nazi realizes he's actually probably going to need government-mandated and -subsidized (via wealth redistribution) healthcare dispensing. I'm a programmer who'll be 50 this year, and I'm not management material, and with globalism and the deceptively easy appearance of outsourcing what I do, it's hard to imagine I'll be able to keep working until whatever age they've raised my Social Security retirement age to (68?).

If the government was to take a heavy hand in anything in all of this, it should've been divorcing health insurance from employment. (But that would not have headed us in the direction that was intended.)

User Journal

Journal Journal: de-militarize the police 8

One good idea from the Dem debate tonight, from Bernie, was to de-militarize the police. I don't recall there being much in the way of specifics, beyond something about them not looking like an occupying force. But it got me thinking, thusly:

1) Make it illegal for the federal government to sell military gear to non-military entities, and make it illegal for civilian police forces purchase surplus military gear. (Whatever private individuals are allowed to buy would be unaltered.)

Comment Re: WALDO (Score 1) 27

The problem with EA concepts is that they're presented via EA terminology. And vice-versa. I don't know if I'll ever get there in my career.

And I get the impression that some EA patterns aren't mutex, but at different levels. Making if confusing to try to Goog what EF implements vice what it allows one to implement.

But my understanding is that Active Record is (usually not recommend and) requires your business objects derive from some base class provided by the OR/M. Which I don't think is required in EF (although maybe in early version(s) it was), so I still want to learn it/how to use an OR/M. But I'm just talking about mapping abilities, as except for as a convenient teaching situation, I don't where anyone would want to use an auto-generated db schema.

Comment Re: WALDO (Score 1) 27

I like this from the wikipedia page for it:

"SQLAlchemy's philosophy is that SQL databases behave less and less like object collections the more size and performance start to matter, while object collections behave less and less like tables and rows the more abstraction starts to matter."

Tomorrow I'm going to look more into the Active Record pattern vs. the Data Mapper pattern. (And I've no idea which (if only one) EF conforms to.)

Comment Re: WALDO (Score 1) 27

Maybe using an OR/M *efficiently* isn't.

Don't hate powerful tools, just learn how to use them properly. Hate the people too lazy to. Even if a majority of users of X use it terribly, it doesn't make X terrible. If I thought that way, I'd be for banning automobiles. Not to mention, that's how we ended up with Java.

Comment Re: moof (Score 1) 27

They think in Waterfall, but act in Agile*. Hence you're dead right on the "thus".

*They want a contract defining the terms so the software builders can't change, after it's been agreed upon, what is to be built. But they want to be able to do so. To me Agile is the realization that all orders for custom software are one-way contracts.

Comment Re: WALDO (Score 1) 27

I dunno, I've never used it/been at a job that has (yet, hopefully), I've only taken a class on an early version of it, 2009 or 10ish. Which I believe was before what I'm guessing you revile â" "code first" â" and other such evil features, and, probably not coincidence, before it was considered a proper OR/M.

p.s. I just thought of a new term to hereby officially invent: data kiddie
It's someone who's just barely out of their 20's who is a (good) sysadmin and thought, gee, how hard could (adding to my repertoire) this database stuff be.

Comment Re: WALDO (Score 1) 27

It looks like you meant to reply to someone else, who was evidently arguing that you only need to model the business logic. Which of course is only true when the data storage is trivial.

I know MS's ORM for .NET, Entity Framework, for example, supports calling MS SQL Server stored procedures. The DBA staff can and ought to be able organize the data however over-normalized their little naive hearts desire, as long as they map it to the interface for the next layer. (Just as in ASP.NET MVC the proper (not to mention more secure) way is to map the business objects to view model objects, for interfacing with the view.)

Comment Re:WALDO (Score 1) 27

For simple CRUD applications, where there really is no interesting application logic to model, then that makes sense. This is what most of the apps are where I currently work. Just data input forms, essentially, and reports.

Then we had to make a kind of personnel scheduling app. I.e. non-trivial application logic, with all kinds of special conditions and rules. It's a house of cards, because it wasn't designed. It was just hacked, because of thinking like yours.

Comment Re:moof (Score 1) 27

The problem with prototypes is that your bosses then order you to just add on to them to build the real system.

And big, up-front specification as a process can't keep up. Agile is a facing of reality, as ugly as it is, that waterfall denies.

Comment moof (Score 1) 27

15 years in, Agile has given us faster coding, but worse quality.

You mean worse quality than Waterfall when you don't count Waterfall's higher failure rate? Because I think I would factor those in as zeros in the quality dept.

Waterfall was flawed due to its overemphasis on architecture and underemphesis on business

We do Waterfall where I work, and I assure there's no architecture going on! To me Waterfall is an overemphasis on taking the customer's word for it on what he wants and an underemphesis on the realization that the customer actually doesn't know WTF he wants. (And in my experience, what he wants is only discovered/discoverable by showing him what turns out to be *not* what he wants.)

Lean cuts out inefficiency- at the cost of elegance and maintainability.

I thought lean thinking is cutting out waste and maximizing value to the customer. Unless it's known ahead of time that the piece of software is going to be a one-time/throw-away app, then some care towards avoiding wasteful inefficiency in future extensibility is valuable to the customer.

And I thought Devops was just non-developers wanting to feel important too. Just kidding. I thought Devops *is* your QA and sysadmins and security and CM and DBA's, getting in on Agile/applying it to their deployment stuff.

So to me, Agile is Waterfall split into minis of itself and iterated, Agile was inspired by Lean, and Devops is Agile for losers... er, I mean, non- application developer IT peeps.

User Journal

Journal Journal: mostly hasta la pasta

Unfortunately the mix in the journal community long ago ceased being what it had been, so I've done the long-overdue thing and switched my new JE notification from web to email.

Slashdot Top Deals

If it happens once, it's a bug. If it happens twice, it's a feature. If it happens more than twice, it's a design philosophy.

Working...