so much sage software advice is just people inventing epicycles for c, c++, and The Java Programming Language®, and then those people thinking every language should use those epicycles even though it's something handled by a builtin in the one they're currently using
reality is the battlefield
- she/they (pl)
- breadthcharge.net/
the first line goes in Cohost embeds
🐥 I am not embroiled in any legal battle
🐦 other than battles that are legal 🎮
I speak to the universe and it speaks back, in it's own way.
mastodon
email: contact at breadthcharge dot net
I live on the northeast coast of the US.
'non-functional programmer'. 'far left'.
conceptual midwife.
https://cohost.org/NireBryce/post/4929459-here-s-my-five-minut
If you can see the "show contact info" dropdown below, I follow you. If you want me to, ask and I'll think about it.
You must log in to comment.
in reply to @NireBryce's post:
c.f norvig's "design patterns in dynamic languages"
and also the x-y problem
never heard em called epicycles before but that's a lovely term of art
morganastra would use it whenever someone was using the wrong mental model politically and trying to make it fit, and I know use it to describe Python With A Java 7 Accent and other things of that category
half these methods are built into classes please read one book written after 2003
the reason you don't understand object oriented programming is because it's obvious these days and you're overthinking it, but consultants needed to earn their keep once the managers started programming, and they've kept up the ruse
this is also true for "agile" if it involves a slide with a flowchart
we worked as a software engineer for like a year and a half max—it was not a job for us, if indeed any "job for us" exists at all—and one of those years was at a startup where some guy pushed the Design Patterns book into my hands and I just...I just couldn't take it seriously, and to this day I'm not exactly sure why. "more nails than wood" was the clichéd expression that came to mind, anyway. ~Chara
that's a great description.
"i'm already doing this" is what i thought. "that's kind of a trivial idea to give such a pompous sounding name"
it's really just a vocab list and almost half the stuff on it is obsolete :)
yeah, much of that is because the language designers of your language already read the book one to two decades prior to contributing to the language
yeah when it comes to questions like "should you study for this" and "is this a difficult concept to grasp" i have a very poor picture of the general situation. that's always come easier to me, and when something like this is just putting labels on stuff i figured out myself it's less of a "core essentials you should absorb" and more just someone's favored phraseology.
imo if an interviewer asks about it and refuses to explain it to you when asked these days, consider just leaving, you've probably dodged a bullet.
not that I have much experience job searching these days.
What does epicycle mean here? I agree with the overall point but I don’t get the reference in the word (if it is one).
the things geocentric astronomers invented to explain how the planets moved if the earth was the center of the solar system
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferent_and_epicycle
Okay, interesting. I knew that meaning but i failed to see the analogy. What is the truth you think users of those languages are missing (when they invented the Visitor pattern, for example)?
they were things built because the languages didn't offer ways that squared up with reality, and collaboration was such that you wanted rigid adherence.
but these days a lot of the time they're tacked on for the sake of it and not actually because it increases comprehension particularly well.
I don't mind the newer ones, for example, but every so often I trip over python that's written like 2005 era java in the worst of ways, with everything being something from the GoF book.
and that's just design patterns, not any of the other things consultants actively created epicycles for to justify themselves, like whatever they're saying agile means today, just bolting more and more fractal delegation/hierarchy/etc onto agile
Oh yeah, okay, that makes a lot more sense. Thanks for the explanation.