What the heck does this mean?
-
I can think of 3 points: 1. Using the strength of the language/environment (what is it for Ruby?) 2. Using common 'best-practices' - but why that should be different between Ruby and other languages? 3. The actual look-and-feel of your code - and I mean that your code is not write-only, and can be used in a group too... In any way such a question would - in most cases at least - turn me hot...It sounds me like a 'tech' guy who didn't got over the slogans and buzzwords of the subject... If you want the job, beware! Do not make him fool!
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
If you want the job, beware! Do not make him fool!
Very good advice. :) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
-
Not sure. Perhaps the filter confused the word 'duck' with something else ;)
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
SoMad wrote:
Perhaps the filter confused the word 'duck' with something else
Well, in my opinion, any conversation on duck-typing should be moderated! :-D Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
-
Sure. BTW, there are currently 2 posts from Kornfeld in the Moderation Queue.
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
It's OK I'm getting used to it in the last two days...and I not even use words like a*se and d*ck...
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
-
Mark_Wallace wrote:
Many Ruby wallahs think that .NET guys don't do enough testing.
I suspect that is it, but I can't help wondering what else he might mean. I think the first thing I will do is fire back the question "What is your perception of .NET practices?" Might lead to an interesting conversation, or at least a revealing one. Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
Marc Clifton wrote:
"What is your perception of .NET practices? I mean, I've been places where I don't think they do enough testing, but most places aren't too bad."
As Lotrice will tell you, you've gotta get a good punch in first.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
CDP1802 wrote:
If you have the option: Run as fast and as far you can.
I do, but I also don't want to turn down what could be a lucrative contract. I'll have to do a bit of interviewing the interviewer myself. :) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
Money is not everything. It really sounds like they declare all their grand ideas to be 'best practices' and the lucrative contract quickly becomes an endless drama. I have seen that before: "It's a 'best practice' to do it that way." "Certainly not. It's wrong, causes an error reported by the users and is generally considered to be an anti-pattern." "Then it's a convention of ours!" "You made a convention out of deliberately introducing bugs?" Really, be careful. I have learned to fear the words 'best practice' or 'convention'. Often enough you should read those two as 'dogma'.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a fucking golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?" "You mean like from space?" "No, from Canada." -
I can think of 3 points: 1. Using the strength of the language/environment (what is it for Ruby?) 2. Using common 'best-practices' - but why that should be different between Ruby and other languages? 3. The actual look-and-feel of your code - and I mean that your code is not write-only, and can be used in a group too... In any way such a question would - in most cases at least - turn me hot...It sounds me like a 'tech' guy who didn't got over the slogans and buzzwords of the subject... If you want the job, beware! Do not make him fool!
Skipper: We'll fix it. Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this? Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
1. Using the strength of the language/environment (what is it for Ruby?)
2. Using common 'best-practices' - but why that should be different between Ruby and other languages?Not sure. I could see someone objecting to trying to write C# like Java or vice versa; but C# and Ruby are different enough that I don't see how you could abuse one into looking like the other. :confused:
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
-
Money is not everything. It really sounds like they declare all their grand ideas to be 'best practices' and the lucrative contract quickly becomes an endless drama. I have seen that before: "It's a 'best practice' to do it that way." "Certainly not. It's wrong, causes an error reported by the users and is generally considered to be an anti-pattern." "Then it's a convention of ours!" "You made a convention out of deliberately introducing bugs?" Really, be careful. I have learned to fear the words 'best practice' or 'convention'. Often enough you should read those two as 'dogma'.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a fucking golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?" "You mean like from space?" "No, from Canada."CDP1802 wrote:
Really, be careful. I have learned to fear the words 'best practice' or 'convention'. Often enough you should read those two as 'dogma'.
Oh, I will, and I completely agree. :) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
-
SoMad wrote:
Perhaps the filter confused the word 'duck' with something else
Well, in my opinion, any conversation on duck-typing should be moderated! :-D Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
-
"arse" is a naughty word.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
I'm doing a phone interview tomorrow with the lead tech guy and he, and I quote: "wants to make sure that your strategies align more with Ruby best practices as opposed to a more traditionally .NET approach." Now, what exactly does that mean? From my experience, Ruby developers have piss poor practices, but I really wonder Ruby brings to the table in terms of practices that are somehow different from "traditional" .NET approaches. All I can think of is leveraging features like mixins that promote bad OO practices. Anyone have a clue? More generally, would you say that [Java / C / PHP / F# / etc.] has best practices that distinguish it from "traditional .NET" development? Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
Make up a list of .NET bad practices, then answers on how to use Ruby like a gentleman and avoid those practices, while incorporating Ruby best practices.
No object is so beautiful that, under certain conditions, it will not look ugly. - Oscar Wilde
-
So why didn't your message go into the queue? ;)
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
'Cause even the server knows that it's a waste of time trying to make me behave.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
I'm doing a phone interview tomorrow with the lead tech guy and he, and I quote: "wants to make sure that your strategies align more with Ruby best practices as opposed to a more traditionally .NET approach." Now, what exactly does that mean? From my experience, Ruby developers have piss poor practices, but I really wonder Ruby brings to the table in terms of practices that are somehow different from "traditional" .NET approaches. All I can think of is leveraging features like mixins that promote bad OO practices. Anyone have a clue? More generally, would you say that [Java / C / PHP / F# / etc.] has best practices that distinguish it from "traditional .NET" development? Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
This guy is going to tell you that Ruby is "better" than .NET; so, if you want the job, you better agree. Start by Googling why Ruby is "good" (no compiling?) and .NET is "bad" (needs a compiler). Then regurgitate it back to the "tech". (Chances are, he got most of his opinions from the web and has never actually worked with .NET ... in my experience). (And what is "traditional" of C# versus F# ?)
