Comments by "xybersurfer" (@xybersurfer) on "Continuous Delivery" channel.

  1. don't unspecified and incorrect specifications, both allow improper outcomes that are undetected?
    1
  2. sequentially making asynchronous calls, could still have the advantage being able to do other things while waiting. but i recognize not being able to take full advantage of asynchronous calls, because of design decision out of my control
    1
  3. great points. i can really relate to not finding the domain as interesting, as the process of developing software
    1
  4. ​ @acasualviewer5861  having always to convert the abstraction level introduces more churn
    1
  5.  @acasualviewer5861  yes NullPointerException is a bug and so is ArithmeticExceptions. but so what if it's a bug? am i supposed to feel guilty now when we know that everything can contain bugs? it's a meaningless distinction. yes in some special cases it's nice to know beforehand what Exceptions can take place, but typically all Exceptions from the same call, are handled the same way. with the simple conclusion, being that the call failed. from a language design perspective, you can't add new checked exceptions to dependencies, without making the code incompatible. the problem is that advertising the possible Exceptions is synonymous to handling them immediately. 2 completely separate concepts. a NullPointerException is actually a language design mistake. it's a popular perversion of the Optional type. it should be up to the developer to choose whether a datatype can be null (Optional) regardless of what the datatype is. again 2 completely separate concepts.
    1
  6. ​ @acasualviewer5861  so what if a ArithmeticExceptions is a bug in the code? checked exceptions can also be the result of a bug. the question is not whether there is a difference between exceptions. most code out there doesn't care about what caused the exception, and just cares about whether or not there was an exception. that's why it's a problem that checked exceptions assume that caller cares. the caller is forced to write boiler plate code to handle it. it's a bad design. it's very naive
    1
  7. ​ @acasualviewer5861  as i said, forcing the caller to declare or handle all possible exceptions is a waste of time for the caller. you didn't understand my reply
    1
  8.  @RolfMuellerAu  i'm jealous
    1
  9. AI generating different things to the same question is due to a setting usually called "Temperature", that makes the output less predictable the higher it is. it was probably created as a way to mask the limitations (i also hate this because i too value reproducibility). if i'm not mistaking, generative AI can be fed its previous output to improve upon. i think the focus should be more on the human making the incremental changes to the specifications. the AI working incrementally is more of a detail, that may or may not be necessary to implement the specifications
    1