Comments by "Vitaly L" (@vitalyl1327) on "Continuous Delivery" channel.

  1.  @world-9644  we need high quality juniors. The current horribly diluted junior pool have an opposite effect, making it impossible to detect and nurture any talent.
    1
  2.  @world-9644  yet, they are indeed a liability, even the brightest ones, but you have to put up with some liabilities long-term. It is an optimisation problem. What makes this problem hard is the very diluted junior pool.
    1
  3. @theafterman1848 you're not very coherent, but from what's possible to decipher from your rambling I can conclude that you worked for a failing company and if you were smart enough you ran from there very quickly.
    1
  4. @theafterman1848 you're pathetic. If your argument is that I can google rants of sore losers like you, conplaining about shortage of jobs - then you know where you must stick your argument. There is a massive shortage of the experienced developers. I struggle finding any, for months. There is an abundance of trash "developers" who should have never been in this industry, and nobody needs them any more, so you may get an impression that there is no shortage, if you're ome of them.
    1
  5. @theafterman1848 only CRUD crap is ever outsourced anywhere, India included. You're pathetic and you see the very bottom of the barrel, confusing it for the rest of the industry.
    1
  6. @theafterman1848 you will never earn a living as a developer because you're trash, not because someone is "crashing the labour market" (right, to an extend that starting salaries are pushed well into six figures for good).
    1
  7. @theafterman1848 the reality is that I cannot find competent developers. And I see an abundance of worthless "developers". Shortage is real. And stop babbling about outsourcing, only the bottom of the barrel projects are ever outsourced.
    1
  8.  @dacianbonta2840  another "let's just glue the libraries together" self-styled developer detected. How hilatious that your lot really believe you have a right to have opinions.
    1
  9.  @dacianbonta2840  you're not very coherent, and you clearly have reading comprehension issues. Looks like you're beyond any hope, no amount of training will form you into even a barely useful engineer.
    1
  10.  @h4ck3rd4wg  two words: message passing.
    1
  11.  @secretchefcollective444  the problems are not hard - go to shadertoy and see how easy all the graphics algorithms are when done right. Photoshop is a huge pile of legacy code upon legacy code, awfully overengineered, just like 99% of the other code out there. Most programmers have no idea how to program.
    1
  12.  @secretchefcollective444  examples? Think of, say, CADs. Geometry of the B-Rep is insanely complex. Finding an intersection between two NURBS is computationally intensive and mind-bending. But why? Why people keep using b-rep when all the solutions turn embarrassingly trivial in an implicit representation (such as SDF)? Same goes for 2D image processing - just turning your data into a right form eliminates all the complexity from the problem.
    1
  13.  @secretchefcollective444  it's perfectly possible to derive splines from SDFs (for slicers, for any forms of CNC). Much easier than from b-rep. More so, SDF is ideal for modelling the tool path for CNC. And yes, mesh-based systems are overengineered too.
    1
  14. Not all languages. Some are vastly more awful than the others. Good languages tend to be designed by people who know what they're doing, who have a deep knowledge in PLT and in compiler construction. Really bad languages, like Javascript, PHP and Python, tend to be designed by eager amateurs. Somewhat less crappy languages are designed by amateurs but later fixed (or at least specified) by professionals - case in point here is Java, with spec written by Guy Steele Jr.
    1
  15.  @chrisjsewell  I'd say both Python and JS are exceptionally awful scripting languages and must be avoided. There are far better options.
    1
  16.  @chrisjsewell  various Scheme implementations, for example - including the official GNU scripting engine, Guile, and more performant alternatives like Racket. LuaJIT is also very good. Raw Lua is very small footprint and still very capable. Various Forth implementations can be extremely small footprint and yet nearly infinitely capable due to the meta nature of the language. Even Tcl have its place, and often is a right tool for embedded scripting (in this one I might be biased, as nearly all EDA tools are scripted with Tcl).
    1
  17. There is only one meaning to "M.A.D." - mutually assured destruction. People must stop trying to fit anything else there.
    1
  18.  @ApprendreSansNecessite  language with separate statement and expressions cannot be called functional language, full stop.
    1
  19.  @ApprendreSansNecessite  It's either lambda calculus (which only have expressions), or statements. Not both. ADTs have nothing to do with FP (besides being mostly explored by FP-first languages). Recursion in JS is useless for the lack of tail call optimisation guarantee. But first and foremost, FP = lambda calculus, and lambda calculus is expression-based. Another mandatory thing for FP is strict static scoping. Everything else is optional, but expression-based language, unlimited tail recursion and strict static scoping are mandatory.
    1
  20.  @ApprendreSansNecessite  there is an important property in the pure lambda calculus that is missing from eager languages - it assumes lazy evaluation (to be practical). If your language is eager order, you cannot have a pure lambda, you need at the very least a built in 'if'', along with 'true" and 'false' in some form. So you already cannot get to understand the most essential properties of lambda calculus if you're doing it in an unsuitable (too big and complex) language.
    1
  21.  @ApprendreSansNecessite  later I will produce an example when eager order makes it impossible to evaluate a term (hard to do so typing on a mobile). Sure, learning FP with whatever tools you have is better than not learning at all. Just keep in mind that results of such learning may be quite incomplete. JS is very far from an "ideal" language for anything, not just learning FP, and the only virtue it have is (and you seem to agree) is that a newbie is likely to already know some bits of JS due to its popularity and accessibility. It is a new Basic in this regard. Which is rather sad.
    1
  22. Take a look at Mathematica, and you'll never think of Python as more than a toy.
    1
  23.  @twodyport8080  what planet you are from? Because on this planet experience is the opposite - impoasible to find competent developers, recruiters and head-hunters flocking around every single developer they think they can sell. You're obviously doing something very wrong if this is not your experience.
    1
  24.  @bobbycrosby9765  sure, but you can have a zero cost log (see above).
    1
  25.  @juleslondon3088  No AI, even superhuman AI, will be able to extract an information that *is not there*.
    1
  26. @juleslondon3088  you cannot infer the information that is not there. You can guess, and all your guesses will be, likely, very wrong. Code only tells the half of the story and there is no way you can correctly infer the intention, the constraints, the larger context from a piece of code. Like in my timing example in the other thread here - no amount of guessing will give you the actual physical timing. You'd have to buy or rent a 10gs scope and do the experiments in the physical world.
    1
  27. @ in my experience, the vast majority of relevant information is outside of the code, and cannot be inferred. But this can be a difference between problem domains, of course. If yours is some standard CRUD, some typical web stuff, then yes, code will be pretty descriptive of the intention. In my case it is not - a lot of information is about the hardware and the physics of the real world, and often a result of some pretty complex mathematics, and if it's missing from the code, it cannot be guessed.
    1
  28. it's more about the real quality of the majority of developers and architects than about some perceived capabilities of this so-called "AI" (in fact, just statistical predictive model). If a majority of code monkeys are worse than a dumb predictive model - well, they should not have been code monkeying to start with, and when they're all gone - good riddance.
    1
  29.  @ApprendreSansNecessite  it's a really bad term. Compilation does not define what's the level of the source and target language. A lot of modern compilers consists of dozens of tiny compilers that translate a language into a nearly equivalent language, with some minor changes. Adding some babble like "transpiler" to the mix just confuse people and obscures the meaning of compilation.
    1
  30.  @ApprendreSansNecessite  the word "transpiler" is from colloquial use indeed, you'll never meet it in any PLT papers. So it's important to remind people once in a while that the term is unscientific and is better avoided altogether for adding no real value.
    1
  31.  @MartyrCry  this may only apply to the very junior roles. I rarely see stack even being mentioned in the role descriptions (and I certainly never mention it myself when I write such descriptions), for it's an irrelevant tiny detail.
    1
  32.  @catocall7323  this is the consequence of overabundance of very low quality junior developers from bootcamps and such, they are not generalists and will never be able to turn generalist, they are trained monkeys tuned to a single stack and a very narrow range of problems. Industry adapted to this situation, making it very hard to the few worthy ones to get in and to get noticed at all in the huge pool of the bootcampers. This is an awful sitiation indeed.
    1
  33. @ wrong.
    1
  34.  @fulconandroadcone9488  Like, a 6 years-long onboarding process for juniors to go through all the CS curriculum they've missed?
    1
  35.  @arcomarco7131  there is. Or you know where I can find competent engineers? I am all ears.
    1
  36.  @guamie  agreed, experience correlates with quality but does not guarantee it.
    1
  37.  @kevinmcfarlane2752  there absolutely is a shortage. And it may be caused by how much the pool is diluted by incompetent ones, making it very hard to find the good developers among the masses of mediocrity. Works the other way around, good developers fail to find jobs for they're drowned in the said masses.
    1
  38.  @yugiohfanatic1964  if the same work can be done for 1/10th of the price, it must be done for 1/10th of the price, obviously. The problems start when it turns out that it won't be the same work, not even close.
    1
  39.  @dacianbonta2840  look, no company can train a developer. Never. A good engineer is a product of at least 6 years in a higher education, with a few internships and an active community projects participation. The problem with junions these days is that pool is so diluted with hopelessly bad ones - all the bootcamp graduates, people from second tier universities, etc., that it is impossible to find the good juniors I described above. Most companies simply gave up and don't even try any more. There is absolutely no way companies could step in and replace the function of the proper universities
    1
  40.  @dacianbonta2840  it takes 6 years of a university to prepare an engineer. You now want companies to do it in a few months instead? Really?
    1
  41.  @psychic8872  writing about your code (or anything else) is a way to discipline yourself. A centuries-old discipline trick.
    1
  42.  @7th_CAV_Trooper  AI won't have a context, it can only explain what code is doing (which should be obvious from the code itself), not why it's written this way and why it's written at all in the first place.
    1
  43. @ that's the most important part of any software project. And it's almost always not in the code.
    1
  44.  @7th_CAV_Trooper  wrong. "Why?" may include cases like "this is a workaround for a bug in a third-party component that will become obsolete or misbehave once the bug is fixed", or "this is written like this because the assumption on the input data is this and this". These things must be documented. If not, the remaining code is garbage.
    1
  45.  @7th_CAV_Trooper  commit comments are code documentation. Too bad they're usually "fixing a bug" and that's all.
    1
  46. @7th_CAV_Trooper  commit messages get lost too - large refactorings wipe the history out...
    1
  47.  @7th_CAV_Trooper  commit messages are far from the ideal place for important contextual documentation. Also, a lot of constraints and assumptions stem from physical world, performance experiments, etc., and if not documented will render resulting code meaningless. I just finished debugging an obscure protocol implementation, and I would have done it weeks faster if the original author cared to actually document the timing constraints and the reason behind them. I had to repeat all the original author experiments (some of which were quite expensive) to find out what could have been just documented in the first place.
    1
  48. @jeffthejava1  something documented elsewhere will never be read. Comments are close to the code and it is hard to ignore them. Code without comments is a very poorly written code indeed.
    1
  49. The tech world does not need (and really never needed) juniors churned out by all those bootcamps and sub par universities. They were always useless. Smart fresh people from top universities, with solid STEM degrees, will alway be in demand.
    1
  50.  @gauravtejpal8901  found a bootcamp "graduate"
    1