• 0 Posts
  • 660 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 21st, 2023

help-circle


  • I miss the days when it was simpler as well. Back before there were botnets with hundreds of thousands of compromised routers across several countries that could send tens of terabytes per second of data to your server for a sustained period of time. Back before there were thousands of bots crawling every IP and domain imaginable for exposed, abusable ports and wp-admin endpoints. Back before people started to compete in how many 9s of uptime they supported (before killing that all with LLMs anyway).

    Sadly, we can’t go back to those times. Doing so with a production service would not end well.

    The issue is not npm. Npm is a solution to a problem, even if it isn’t perfect.

    The issue is we live in a different landscape.

    Eclipse was great, having used it in the past, but its features are not exclusive to Eclipse. I can do the same inlining and extracting of code in vscode with code actions. The compile times weren’t seconds for me in the past, but they are for me now. Vite helps that even more (though that’s comparing JS to Java).



  • I agree in general with the list, but there is some stuff I disagree with still. For example, the very first section: “Work on more than one thing”.

    Like a CPU thread, if you’re responsible for multiple streams of work, you can deal with one stream getting blocked by rolling onto another one.

    This is written from the perspective of the developer, not the stakeholders. Compared to a CPU, you are a single thread. You cannot work on two things at the same time. What this is referring to is not parallelism, but a form of concurrency. Like a CPU thread, when two tasks are being executed concurrently, one task is always blocked. This means that while you, the developer, are always working, you also are always blocking at least one task, meaning you are also always blocked on at least one task.

    Instead of working on two tasks at once, pick up the second task only when the first becomes blocked.

    I believe this might be what the author was trying to convey, but the title, some wording in the section, and the bullet point at the end (“Working on at least two things at a time, so when one gets blocked you can switch to the other”) contradict that and give the impression that you should always be working on two or more things at a time.

    use as normal a developer stack as possible.

    This, I mostly agree with, but I disagree with the wording. You should be using the same tools as the rest of your team when the tool matters. However, using different Git interfaces shouldn’t matter. I’d argue the same holds true for editors as long as the editors all have the features needed for the project.

    For application work, some variety in dev environments can help you find bugs sooner even. Using different environments for development lets you test different environments naturally. For services, this is less relevant.


  • This is a super interesting approach to JS. Conceptually, it’s really cool. In practice, I don’t think I’d do it (at least for any projects I can think of) because explaining it to others would be difficult and representing complex logic as “commands” sounds a bit difficult.

    In a weird way, it reminds me of actor frameworks though. The difference is of course the separation of effects.

    One thing I wish the author would have done, though, is add some type hints. I know it’s about JS, but even some jsdoc types would have helped. It was a bit hard to know at first what the input types were to these functions.








  • Yep. This was the difference between a silent, recoverable error and a loud failure.

    It seems like they’re planning to remove all potential panics based on the end of their article. This would be a good idea considering the scale of the service’s usage.

    (Also, for anyone who’s not reading the article, the unwrap caused the service to crash, but wasn’t the source of the issues to begin with. It was just what toppled over first.)







  • monitoring how they are used is good to identify if people are actually more productive with it

    Unfortunately, many jobs skipped this step. The marketing on AI tools should be illegal.

    Far too many CEOs are promised that their employees will do more with less, so of course they give their employees more to do and make them use AI, then fire employees because the remaining ones are supposed to be more productive.

    Some are. Many aren’t.

    Like your comparison, the issue is that it’s not the right tool for every job, nor is it the right tool for everyone. (Whether it’s the right tool for anyone is another question of course, but some people feel more productive with it at times, so I’ll just leave it at that.)

    Anyway, I’m fortunate enough to be in a position where AI is only strongly encouraged, but not forced. My friend was not though. Then he used it because he had to, despite it being useless to him. Then he, a chunk of his management chain, and half his department were fired. Nobody was hired to replace them.