www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - [OT] Extra time spent

reply "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
Reading through Adam's book at home made me think about how much 
time I've spent reading / learning / thinking about programs 
outside the office. I read TDPL in my spare time. I checked out 
things in the D Cookbook in my spare time and applied them the 
next day, like loads of other things about programming and actual 
programs. I guess most people here have similar experiences. The 
issue is that most employers don't really appreciate this. Are we 
mad or just passionate?
May 30 2014
next sibling parent "Wyatt" <wyatt.epp gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 11:35:19 UTC, Chris wrote:

 Are we mad or just passionate?


Yes.
May 30 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Kagamin" <spam here.lot> writes:
On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 11:35:19 UTC, Chris wrote:

 The issue is that most employers don't really appreciate this.


Your employer doesn't appreciate professional growth?
May 30 2014
next sibling parent reply "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 14:26:46 UTC, Kagamin wrote:

 On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 11:35:19 UTC, Chris wrote:

 The issue is that most employers don't really appreciate this.


 Your employer doesn't appreciate professional growth?


My point was that they are not aware of the fact that we spend a 
lot of our spare time learning and improving things.
May 30 2014
next sibling parent "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 14:31:26 UTC, Chris wrote:

 On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 14:26:46 UTC, Kagamin wrote:

 On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 11:35:19 UTC, Chris wrote:

 The issue is that most employers don't really appreciate this.


 Your employer doesn't appreciate professional growth?


 My point was that they are not aware of the fact that we spend 
 a lot of our spare time learning and improving things.


... and money, by the way.
May 30 2014
prev sibling parent reply "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Chris:


 My point was that they are not aware of the fact that we spend 
 a lot of our spare time learning and improving things.


Every programmer worth the job (and even most that are not worth 
it) uses some time every day or every week to learn. The employer 
should be aware of this. Otherwise it's a good moment to explain 
to the employer this basis fact :-)

Bye,
bearophile
May 30 2014
parent "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 14:35:45 UTC, bearophile wrote:

 Chris:


 My point was that they are not aware of the fact that we spend 
 a lot of our spare time learning and improving things.


 Every programmer worth the job (and even most that are not 
 worth it) uses some time every day or every week to learn. The 
 employer should be aware of this. Otherwise it's a good moment 
 to explain to the employer this basis fact :-)

 Bye,
 bearophile


"Laws, like sausages, cease to inspire respect in proportion as 
we know how they are made."

... and software :)

Btw, it wasn't Bismarck who said this. Apparently it was John 
Godfrey Sax. Great! I'll never have to quote Bismarck again!
May 30 2014
prev sibling parent reply "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 14:26:46 UTC, Kagamin wrote:

 On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 11:35:19 UTC, Chris wrote:

 The issue is that most employers don't really appreciate this.


 Your employer doesn't appreciate professional growth?


Some companies think: what if they learn better and leave ?
Other prefers: What if they don't and stay ?
Jun 01 2014
parent reply "w0rp" <devw0rp gmail.com> writes:
I can't get enough of programming myself. I'm only 25 at the 
moment, but programming has been endless fun for me. I've noticed 
that there are a lot of cynical programmers in the UK who stay 
far away from programming outside of their working day, but I 
annoy all of those guys by talking about programming too much. 
I'm probably known as "the guy who won't shut up about this D 
thing," among other things.
Jun 01 2014
next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 1 June 2014 at 23:59:32 UTC, w0rp wrote:

 I can't get enough of programming myself.


I just seem to go through phases. Sometimes, I can sit down and 
do something like write a game from scratch in a month (that 
hasn't happened since I started coding to pay the bills tho :( ). 
Other times, I don't do much of anything for a month.

Right now I'm kinda in the middle: doing just enough to keep the 
day job going then more or less disconnecting and not coming back 
until the next job requirement.


 I'm probably known as "the guy who won't shut up about this D 
 thing," among other things.


D rox
Jun 01 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 23:59:30 +0000
w0rp via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:


 I'm probably known as "the guy who won't shut up about this D
 thing," among other things.


Aren't we all? ;)

- Jonathan M Davis
Jun 01 2014
prev sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/1/2014 7:59 PM, w0rp wrote:

 I can't get enough of programming myself. I'm only 25 at the moment, but
 programming has been endless fun for me.


I always used to be like that (hell, I was *known* for that). But then 
once I started doing it for $ that quickly sucked most of the enjoyment 
out of it. Seems to be that everything changes when you're doing 
something as a job instead of just for the heck of it.

Like cooking: The worst jobs I've ever had (by far) were in restaurants, 
but I've slowly been enjoying cooking at home more and more. Last night 
I've even cooked up a little something just to unwind, which was quite a 
strange first for me.

Anyway, point being, doing something for a paycheck always seems to 
change it just enough to suck all the fun out of it. At least for me anyway.
Jun 02 2014
next sibling parent reply "Meta" <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 17:41:09 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 I always used to be like that (hell, I was *known* for that). 
 But then once I started doing it for $ that quickly sucked most 
 of the enjoyment out of it. Seems to be that everything changes 
 when you're doing something as a job instead of just for the 
 heck of it.

 Like cooking: The worst jobs I've ever had (by far) were in 
 restaurants, but I've slowly been enjoying cooking at home more 
 and more. Last night I've even cooked up a little something 
 just to unwind, which was quite a strange first for me.

 Anyway, point being, doing something for a paycheck always 
 seems to change it just enough to suck all the fun out of it. 
 At least for me anyway.


This may be a sign that your work is not interesting and/or 
challenging enough, or you're not getting an opportunity to learn 
new things. One of the most fun coding experiences I've had in a 
long time was implementing a simple scripting language at my 
current job.
Jun 02 2014
next sibling parent "Meta" <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 17:52:03 UTC, Meta wrote:

 This may be a sign that your work is not interesting and/or 
 challenging enough, or you're not getting an opportunity to 
 learn new things. One of the most fun coding experiences I've 
 had in a long time was implementing a simple scripting language 
 at my current job.


Unfortunately, I tried to get my boss to let me use D for this 
task, and another small script later on, but that was a no-go.
Jun 02 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/2/2014 1:52 PM, Meta wrote:

 On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 17:41:09 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 I always used to be like that (hell, I was *known* for that). But then
 once I started doing it for $ that quickly sucked most of the
 enjoyment out of it. Seems to be that everything changes when you're
 doing something as a job instead of just for the heck of it.

 Like cooking: The worst jobs I've ever had (by far) were in
 restaurants, but I've slowly been enjoying cooking at home more and
 more. Last night I've even cooked up a little something just to
 unwind, which was quite a strange first for me.

 Anyway, point being, doing something for a paycheck always seems to
 change it just enough to suck all the fun out of it. At least for me
 anyway.


 This may be a sign that your work is not interesting and/or challenging
 enough, or you're not getting an opportunity to learn new things. One of
 the most fun coding experiences I've had in a long time was implementing
 a simple scripting language at my current job.


Quite likely, yes. Unfortunately though, when a paycheck is required we 
don't always get to choose our work, and the interesting things aren't 
always monetizable (well, maybe they would be if I were some brilliant 
business mind). Sometimes something just needs to get done, or you just 
need to take what you can get. Doesn't help that I just plain can't 
function in a 9-5 cubicle farm (although 8-5 or 9-6 is much more 
accurate due to lunch hour), or maintain a *sustained* 45-hour/week 
interest in *any* one single thing.

But I've been doing what I can though. For example, I've had enough PHP, 
VB-ASP, Flash, C++, etc., in the past that I've started getting much 
more insistent now on using D whenever I can manage. Life's too short to 
muddle through with bad tools, even if they're *cough* "mature" bad 
tools (As if something like PHP or Flash could ever be considered 
mature). Various recent Facebook news will likely help in this regard. 
I've had FAR too many conversations with fools trying to justify PHP 
with "Well Facebook is written in PHP!" which is just *wrong* in soooo 
many different ways (ex: It isn't even REAL PHP, it's HipHop, they had 
to roll their OWN PHP like three times). So I'm very excited to be able 
to say "Uhh, Facebook *does* use some D" or point people to...umm...that 
PHP-replacement language they recently announced, forget the name of it.
Jun 02 2014
prev sibling parent reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 17:52:03 UTC, Meta wrote:

 This may be a sign that your work is not interesting and/or 
 challenging enough, or you're not getting an opportunity to 
 learn new things.


Or you're learning new things about pain :P

But I kinda like mindless work; it leaves me more brain cycles to 
run on daydreaming and has no risk of spilling over into other 
times - with boring or trivial work I have no desire at all to 
keep working on it after hours leaving the time free for other 
stuff. Helps make sure I get to bed on time!
Jun 02 2014
parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/2/2014 8:41 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 17:52:03 UTC, Meta wrote:

 This may be a sign that your work is not interesting and/or
 challenging enough, or you're not getting an opportunity to learn new
 things.


 Or you're learning new things about pain :P

 But I kinda like mindless work; it leaves me more brain cycles to run on
 daydreaming and has no risk of spilling over into other times - with
 boring or trivial work I have no desire at all to keep working on it
 after hours leaving the time free for other stuff. Helps make sure I get
 to bed on time!


Yea, it's the stuff that requires an engaged mind *and* isn't fun that 
are real drags (yet again, PHP is a prime example ;) ).

At one programming job I had, there were a couple days another dept 
needed me for some data entry. Once you get into the flow of that it's 
very "zen", and you still have a bigger sense of progress than typical 
software development. And there's much less to get irritated about. So 
that was pretty cool.

And manually sorting/alphabetizing/etc can be satisfying and relaxing 
too...but maybe that's just the slight OCD-ness in me ;) I think I'd do 
well as a library reshelver ;)
Jun 02 2014
prev sibling parent reply "w0rp" <devw0rp gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 17:41:09 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 6/1/2014 7:59 PM, w0rp wrote:

 I can't get enough of programming myself. I'm only 25 at the 
 moment, but
 programming has been endless fun for me.


 I always used to be like that (hell, I was *known* for that). 
 But then once I started doing it for $ that quickly sucked most 
 of the enjoyment out of it. Seems to be that everything changes 
 when you're doing something as a job instead of just for the 
 heck of it.

 Like cooking: The worst jobs I've ever had (by far) were in 
 restaurants, but I've slowly been enjoying cooking at home more 
 and more. Last night I've even cooked up a little something 
 just to unwind, which was quite a strange first for me.

 Anyway, point being, doing something for a paycheck always 
 seems to change it just enough to suck all the fun out of it. 
 At least for me anyway.


I've been working off and on for three years now and it hasn't 
changed my opinion about it. I'm still like, "Hey, this is 
awesome."
Jun 02 2014
parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/2/2014 2:00 PM, w0rp wrote:

 I've been working off and on for three years now and it hasn't changed
 my opinion about it. I'm still like, "Hey, this is awesome."


That's very good. Stay that way :)
Jun 02 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Etienne <etcimon gmail.com> writes:
On 2014-05-30 7:35 AM, Chris wrote:

 Reading through Adam's book at home made me think about how much time
 I've spent reading / learning / thinking about programs outside the
 office. I read TDPL in my spare time. I checked out things in the D
 Cookbook in my spare time and applied them the next day, like loads of
 other things about programming and actual programs. I guess most people
 here have similar experiences. The issue is that most employers don't
 really appreciate this. Are we mad or just passionate?


It's one of those jobs you just can't leave behind you when you're out 
of the office.

I've longed being talented enough to control that like a hand-switch in 
the mind. It's what motivates me to keep learning outside the job. A 
very vicious circle that fuels me daily.
May 30 2014
next sibling parent "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 14:45:22 UTC, Etienne wrote:

 On 2014-05-30 7:35 AM, Chris wrote:

 Reading through Adam's book at home made me think about how 
 much time
 I've spent reading / learning / thinking about programs 
 outside the
 office. I read TDPL in my spare time. I checked out things in 
 the D
 Cookbook in my spare time and applied them the next day, like 
 loads of
 other things about programming and actual programs. I guess 
 most people
 here have similar experiences. The issue is that most 
 employers don't
 really appreciate this. Are we mad or just passionate?


 It's one of those jobs you just can't leave behind you when 
 you're out of the office.

 I've longed being talented enough to control that like a 
 hand-switch in the mind. It's what motivates me to keep 
 learning outside the job. A very vicious circle that fuels me 
 daily.


As you grow older, you learn how to switch off. Switching off is 
the best way to write good code. Forget about it, start anew the 
next day / week and you'll see things clearer. Things always work 
out in the end. If all else fails, ask the forum :)

But I agree, sometimes it's not easy to switch off.
May 30 2014
prev sibling parent "currysoup" <sam92cutler hotmail.co.uk> writes:
On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 14:45:22 UTC, Etienne wrote:

 On 2014-05-30 7:35 AM, Chris wrote:

 Reading through Adam's book at home made me think about how 
 much time
 I've spent reading / learning / thinking about programs 
 outside the
 office. I read TDPL in my spare time. I checked out things in 
 the D
 Cookbook in my spare time and applied them the next day, like 
 loads of
 other things about programming and actual programs. I guess 
 most people
 here have similar experiences. The issue is that most 
 employers don't
 really appreciate this. Are we mad or just passionate?


 It's one of those jobs you just can't leave behind you when 
 you're out of the office.

 I've longed being talented enough to control that like a 
 hand-switch in the mind. It's what motivates me to keep 
 learning outside the job. A very vicious circle that fuels me 
 daily.


The best way to stop working once you get home is get a worse job 
:)
May 30 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
I've actually been doing a lot less programming lately than I 
used to. Even though programming is my day job, I actually write 
pretty little code; I think I spend more time in meetings talking 
about direction (or worse yet, reading third party docs, ugh*) 
than I do actually coding.

* Seriously, in the time it takes me to do anything with a third 
party library I could have written my own twice over. It is so 
tiring to use other people's code.


But I rarely read programming blogs and books and so on anymore, 
unless something interesting comes across the D group (and even 
then I don't read every post anymore like i used to).

I kinda want to get back into writing stuff on my spare time, 
especially now that the book is done, but eh, I'm just so lazy 
and if given the choice to, for example, go clean up the side of 
the road with the missionaries or sitting here reading more 
reddit, I'll grab the trash bag and hit the street.
May 30 2014
next sibling parent reply "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 14:56:49 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 I've actually been doing a lot less programming lately than I 
 used to. Even though programming is my day job, I actually 
 write pretty little code; I think I spend more time in meetings 
 talking about direction (or worse yet, reading third party 
 docs, ugh*) than I do actually coding.

 * Seriously, in the time it takes me to do anything with a 
 third party library I could have written my own twice over. It 
 is so tiring to use other people's code.


Plus, if there's a bug, you're stuck. I like to re-invent the 
wheel too, because existing wheels might not be fit for your 
purpose.


 But I rarely read programming blogs and books and so on 
 anymore, unless something interesting comes across the D group 
 (and even then I don't read every post anymore like i used to).



 I kinda want to get back into writing stuff on my spare time, 
 especially now that the book is done, but eh, I'm just so lazy 
 and if given the choice to, for example, go clean up the side 
 of the road with the missionaries or sitting here reading more 
 reddit, I'll grab the trash bag and hit the street.
May 30 2014
next sibling parent reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 15:09:00 UTC, Chris wrote:

 Plus, if there's a bug, you're stuck. I like to re-invent the 
 wheel too, because existing wheels might not be fit for your 
 purpose.


Aye. But I don't like the term "reinvent the wheel" because 
writing new code isn't really an invention most the time; I often 
don't create new theoretical concepts, it is just a new instance.

To take the wheel analogy further, inventing it would mean things 
like figuring out that it needs to be round, figuring out 
concepts like spokes and tires and inflation etc.

That's not what I'd do if you asked me to get you a wheel. The 
options there are to buy one off-the-shelf or to go ahead and 
build one (quite possibly using some or many off-the-shelf 
components - a few existing library functions here and there - or 
maybe making my own but using existing molds - e.g. looking up 
the algorithm on wikipedia but not downloading an existing 
library).

I already know that round wheels rock and you need to grease the 
hub and that , say, 27 inches is a pretty good size and 36 spokes 
is a nice round number. I don't have to do the research that went 
into figuring all that out.

"Re-inventing the wheel" makes it sound a lot harder than it is. 
In reality, what we're doing when writing our own libraries is 
more like "assembling a new wheel from your existing knowledge".

You don't want to ride on a wheel assembled by an idiot, but if 
an experienced mechanic gave me a wheel she or he build, I'd use 
it and I'd like it. (indeed experienced mechanics tend to take 
very good care of their bikes!)
May 30 2014
next sibling parent "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 15:26:00 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 15:09:00 UTC, Chris wrote:

 Plus, if there's a bug, you're stuck. I like to re-invent the 
 wheel too, because existing wheels might not be fit for your 
 purpose.


 Aye. But I don't like the term "reinvent the wheel" because 
 writing new code isn't really an invention most the time; I 
 often don't create new theoretical concepts, it is just a new 
 instance.

 To take the wheel analogy further, inventing it would mean 
 things like figuring out that it needs to be round, figuring 
 out concepts like spokes and tires and inflation etc.

 That's not what I'd do if you asked me to get you a wheel. The 
 options there are to buy one off-the-shelf or to go ahead and 
 build one (quite possibly using some or many off-the-shelf 
 components - a few existing library functions here and there - 
 or maybe making my own but using existing molds - e.g. looking 
 up the algorithm on wikipedia but not downloading an existing 
 library).

 I already know that round wheels rock and you need to grease 
 the hub and that , say, 27 inches is a pretty good size and 36 
 spokes is a nice round number. I don't have to do the research 
 that went into figuring all that out.

 "Re-inventing the wheel" makes it sound a lot harder than it 
 is. In reality, what we're doing when writing our own libraries 
 is more like "assembling a new wheel from your existing 
 knowledge".

 You don't want to ride on a wheel assembled by an idiot, but if 
 an experienced mechanic gave me a wheel she or he build, I'd 
 use it and I'd like it. (indeed experienced mechanics tend to 
 take very good care of their bikes!)


You're right there. "Reinventing the wheel" is often used, when 
you don't want to use 3rd party software, to make you look like 
an idiot.

For a server app I had to create HTML output. What did I do? I 
rolled my own dom module in D (187 lines of D code, including 
comments). Now I have a perfectly fine dom tree that does more 
than possible with JS. Had I used a 3rd party library, it would 
have taken me days to get it working properly, no customization 
possible, plus I would have additional library dependencies. And 
... you learn a lot while "reinventing the wheel" too.
May 30 2014
prev sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 03:25:59PM +0000, Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 15:09:00 UTC, Chris wrote:

Plus, if there's a bug, you're stuck. I like to re-invent the wheel
too, because existing wheels might not be fit for your purpose.




That's why I swore off proprietary software many years ago. It's all
nice and good when it works, but when it doesn't, and the vendor has no
motivation to fix it, you're stuck.

Having said that, though, open source projects that are complex enough
and poorly-written enough can effectively be unmodifiable too. You *can*
modify it, but it would take far more effort to identify what needs to
be fixed, than to write the thing from scratch yourself.

Plus, far too often a lot of libraries come bundled with many extra
unnecessary features that you don't need -- which is harmless in and of
itself, but when they in turn depend on other libraries and external
dependencies, then it quickly becomes a case of "yes this library does
what I need, but I'm spending far too much time figuring out how to
compile the parts of it that I don't even use, why not just write the
darn thing myself instead?!".

Worse, sometimes the library *almost* does what you need, but it's
missing feature X (or even more infuriatingly, implements it almost
completely except for that one last bit that you really, *really* need).
This is why I was strongly drawn to D -- its metaprogramming
capabilities allow you to design generic components that are truly
reusable, without needless dependencies and unnecessary specificity that
would limit its reusability. Things like the range API decouple library
code from concrete range types, so that a matrix library can be
implemented without any dependencies on concrete matrix types, for
example. *That* is true reusability.



 Aye. But I don't like the term "reinvent the wheel" because writing
 new code isn't really an invention most the time; I often don't create
 new theoretical concepts, it is just a new instance.



From my quotes file:


	It is widely believed that reinventing the wheel is a waste of
	time; but I disagree: without wheel reinventers, we would be
	still be stuck with wooden horse-cart wheels.

;-)


T

-- 
Valentine's Day: an occasion for florists to reach into the wallets of
nominal lovers in dire need of being reminded to profess their
hypothetical love for their long-forgotten.
May 30 2014
parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 5/30/2014 9:25 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 	It is widely believed that reinventing the wheel is a waste of
 	time; but I disagree: without wheel reinventers, we would be
 	still be stuck with wooden horse-cart wheels.


It is interesting to look at the evolution of car wheels over time.
Jun 01 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Ary Borenszweig <ary esperanto.org.ar> writes:
On 5/30/14, 12:08 PM, Chris wrote:

 On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 14:56:49 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 I've actually been doing a lot less programming lately than I used to.
 Even though programming is my day job, I actually write pretty little
 code; I think I spend more time in meetings talking about direction
 (or worse yet, reading third party docs, ugh*) than I do actually coding.

 * Seriously, in the time it takes me to do anything with a third party
 library I could have written my own twice over. It is so tiring to use
 other people's code.


 Plus, if there's a bug, you're stuck.


No. You open a pull request. Or reopen and redefine the wrong code ;-)
May 30 2014
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2014-05-30 18:17, Ary Borenszweig wrote:


 No. You open a pull request. Or reopen and redefine the wrong code ;-)


The beauty of Ruby, just monkey patch the bug :)

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Jun 01 2014
parent reply Ary Borenszweig <ary esperanto.org.ar> writes:
On 6/1/14, 4:10 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2014-05-30 18:17, Ary Borenszweig wrote:


 No. You open a pull request. Or reopen and redefine the wrong code ;-)


 The beauty of Ruby, just monkey patch the bug :)


In my opinion, even though this seems ugly, when you need to ship code 
and the library you are using is fine except for a small issue, and you 
don't have time to send a pull request and wait for it to get fixed, 
that is a very handy solution.

Another one is forking the project and pointing your dependency to it, 
which lately I'm doing more and more.
Jun 02 2014
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 02/06/14 20:26, Ary Borenszweig wrote:


 In my opinion, even though this seems ugly, when you need to ship code
 and the library you are using is fine except for a small issue, and you
 don't have time to send a pull request and wait for it to get fixed,
 that is a very handy solution.

 Another one is forking the project and pointing your dependency to it,
 which lately I'm doing more and more.


Yeah, but the advantage of monkey patching is that it can be done in the 
same project that uses it.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Jun 02 2014
parent reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 3 June 2014 at 06:44:12 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 Yeah, but the advantage of monkey patching is that it can be 
 done in the same project that uses it.


Monkey patching can be done in D too if you're crazy enough to 
try it :P

use pragma(mangle) to replace library functions with your own 
versions...
Jun 03 2014
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2014-06-03 17:23, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:


 Monkey patching can be done in D too if you're crazy enough to try it :P


Sure, but it's a lot easier and more convenient to do in Ruby.


 use pragma(mangle) to replace library functions with your own versions...


Can you call the original function somehow if pragma(mangle) is used?

There was also an old D1 library, flectioned [1],  that could do 
something similar, if I recall correctly. Although, it only worked for 
Windows and Linux, which I don't use.

[1] http://flectioned.kuehne.cn/

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Jun 03 2014
prev sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 5/30/2014 8:08 AM, Chris wrote:

 I like to re-invent the wheel too, because
 existing wheels might not be fit for your purpose.


A few years back I invented a triangular wheel, which was an improvement over 
the square ones because it had one less bump.

Unfortunately, I should have reviewed existing literature on the topic first.
Jun 01 2014
next sibling parent reply "John" <john.joyus gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 1 June 2014 at 19:22:44 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 5/30/2014 8:08 AM, Chris wrote:

 I like to re-invent the wheel too, because
 existing wheels might not be fit for your purpose.


 A few years back I invented a triangular wheel, which was an 
 improvement over the square ones because it had one less bump.



RTFL!!
Jun 01 2014
parent "ed" <gmail gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 03:08:33 UTC, John wrote:

 On Sunday, 1 June 2014 at 19:22:44 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 5/30/2014 8:08 AM, Chris wrote:

 I like to re-invent the wheel too, because
 existing wheels might not be fit for your purpose.


 A few years back I invented a triangular wheel, which was an 
 improvement over the square ones because it had one less bump.



 RTFL!!


 From my experience on both large and small teams reinvention has 
always been a fools paradise. When you factor in maintenance, 
documentation, testing, API and code quality and internal 
training it rarely pays off.


Cheers,
ed
Jun 01 2014
prev sibling parent reply "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 15:22:44 -0400, Walter Bright  
<newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:


 On 5/30/2014 8:08 AM, Chris wrote:

 I like to re-invent the wheel too, because
 existing wheels might not be fit for your purpose.


 A few years back I invented a triangular wheel, which was an improvement  
 over the square ones because it had one less bump.


How do you fix the square bearing problem? I still can't figure that one  
out.

-Steve
Jun 02 2014
next sibling parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/2/2014 10:19 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

 On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 15:22:44 -0400, Walter Bright
 <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 A few years back I invented a triangular wheel, which was an
 improvement over the square ones because it had one less bump.


 How do you fix the square bearing problem? I still can't figure that one
 out.


Lots of grease.
Jun 02 2014
prev sibling parent "SomeDude" <lolilol mailmetrash.com> writes:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 14:19:32 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
wrote:

 On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 15:22:44 -0400, Walter Bright 
 <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:


 On 5/30/2014 8:08 AM, Chris wrote:

 I like to re-invent the wheel too, because
 existing wheels might not be fit for your purpose.


 A few years back I invented a triangular wheel, which was an 
 improvement over the square ones because it had one less bump.


 How do you fix the square bearing problem? I still can't figure 
 that one out.

 -Steve


https://www.sciencenews.org/article/riding-square-wheels
Jun 08 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent Etienne <etcimon gmail.com> writes:
On 2014-05-30 10:56 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 I kinda want to get back into writing stuff on my spare time, especially
 now that the book is done, but eh, I'm just so lazy and if given the
 choice to, for example, go clean up the side of the road with the
 missionaries or sitting here reading more reddit, I'll grab the trash
 bag and hit the street.


I've felt like that before, when I had hit a major project endpoint with 
good success. Feeling like you could just take that year off and do 
something else and everything's going to be fine.

It's really a unique state of mind that I think, will come only at very 
few occasions in a lifetime considering the nature of the profession.
May 30 2014
prev sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 5/30/2014 7:56 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 I kinda want to get back into writing stuff on my spare time, especially now
 that the book is done, but eh, I'm just so lazy and if given the choice to, for
 example, go clean up the side of the road with the missionaries or sitting here
 reading more reddit, I'll grab the trash bag and hit the street.


I find that going to the garage and working on my car, which has zero 
electronics in it (let alone digital electronics) to be very therapeutic.

(However, I did upgrade the mechanical spark system with an electronic one. I'm 
still ashamed about that.)
Jun 01 2014
parent reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 1 June 2014 at 19:20:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 I find that going to the garage and working on my car, which 
 has zero electronics in it (let alone digital electronics) to 
 be very therapeutic.


Aye, I know another programmer locally who didn't even have a 
computer at home, he preferred to do woodworking in his off time 
(and primarily with hand tools at that). He's currently teaching 
CS at the community college.


It's interesting how often people assume people who work with 
computers in some way, programmers, sysadmins, CS professors, 
what-have-you are always some kind of super techie. I find that 
is sometimes true, but a lot of times it isn't.

I'm on my computer a *lot*, but that's about it in terms of 
gadgets for me. I don't have a smartphone, don't use an ipad or 
whatever (though I do actually own one, it was given to me for a 
job a while ago, only thing I've ever used it for is to watch 
sports I can't get on my tv antenna).

I don't use those GPS things either, I prefer to just hit the 
road and let the wind take me where it takes me. (Of course, I 
also don't drive, I take the bicycle and let me tell you, the 

any ride painful.)

but yeah I can program just about anything you can dream of, 
given a little time, just don't ask me to fix your viruses, the 
best I'll do is tell you to reinstall.
Jun 01 2014
next sibling parent reply Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 21:01:54 +0000
"Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:


 On Sunday, 1 June 2014 at 19:20:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 I find that going to the garage and working on my car, which
 has zero electronics in it (let alone digital electronics) to
 be very therapeutic.


 It's interesting how often people assume people who work with
 computers in some way, programmers, sysadmins, CS professors,
 what-have-you are always some kind of super techie. I find that
 is sometimes true, but a lot of times it isn't.


Pretty much everyone does things for fun that don't involve computers (and
it's definitely the case that many professional programmers rarely touch their
computers at home), but in general, I would have expected that the kinds of
folks who would post here would be doing a fair bit with their computers in
their free time (especially those who also do work on dmd, druntime, or
Phobos).


 but yeah I can program just about anything you can dream of,
 given a little time, just don't ask me to fix your viruses, the
 best I'll do is tell you to reinstall.


Aren't you supposed to tell them to install Linux at that point. ;)

- Jonathan M Davis
Jun 01 2014
parent reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 00:26:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:

 I would have expected that the kinds of
 folks who would post here would be doing a fair bit with their 
 computers in their free time (especially those who also do work 
 on dmd, druntime, or Phobos).


Yea, I do too (not as much code for a while but obviously I've 
done a lot of that too) it is just really nice to unplug from it 
all.


 Aren't you supposed to tell them to install Linux at that 
 point. ;)


I used to do that, but it never ended well so I don't anymore...

Of course, Linux has come a long way in the last decade, but I 
still don't think it works as well for the typical end user as 
Windows.
Jun 01 2014
next sibling parent Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Mon, 02 Jun 2014 01:30:07 +0000
"Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:


 Aren't you supposed to tell them to install Linux at that
 point. ;)


 I used to do that, but it never ended well so I don't anymore...

 Of course, Linux has come a long way in the last decade, but I
 still don't think it works as well for the typical end user as
 Windows.


LOL. Yeah, I meant it as more of a joke than anything. Depending on what
someone needs to do with their computer, if you set it up for them, Linux can
work fantastically for non-power users, but if they need any Windows-specific
programs, then that falls apart pretty quickly (especially if they're not
willing to learn the alternatives which exist on Linux), and you're stuck
maintaining their computer for them whenever maintenance issues come up,
whereas with Windows, there's a decent chance that someone else could do it
for them. Much as I hate Mac OS X, I'd probably be quicker to send someone
there than to Linux just because it's designed to be stupid simple.

- Jonathan M Davis
Jun 01 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 01:30:08 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 Of course, Linux has come a long way in the last decade, but I 
 still don't think it works as well for the typical end user as 
 Windows.


Depends on what user you target. From experience, here is what 
happen:
  - A user that already know some window or OSX will find it very 
confusing.
  - A user that know close to nothing about computer actually do 
better than on windows (I don't have experience for OSX).

It depends on your subject.
Jun 01 2014
prev sibling parent "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 01:30:08 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 00:26:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via 
 Digitalmars-d wrote:

 I would have expected that the kinds of
 folks who would post here would be doing a fair bit with their 
 computers in their free time (especially those who also do 
 work on dmd, druntime, or Phobos).


 Yea, I do too (not as much code for a while but obviously I've 
 done a lot of that too) it is just really nice to unplug from 
 it all.


 Aren't you supposed to tell them to install Linux at that 
 point. ;)


 I used to do that, but it never ended well so I don't anymore...

 Of course, Linux has come a long way in the last decade, but I 
 still don't think it works as well for the typical end user as 
 Windows.


I recently converted my dad over to linux for his general purpose 
computer. As far as I can tell he's very pleased with it and 
significantly prefers it to his previous windows machines and 
even the mac mini he had briefly.

Windows specific programs aside, something like Linux Mint + 
Cinnamon makes for a very good day to day computer. In 
particular, having a package manager really helps to dissuade the 
end-user from installing anything that happens to look 
nice/useful on a random website.
Jun 02 2014
prev sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/1/2014 5:01 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 I don't have a smartphone, don't use an ipad or whatever (though I
 do actually own one, it was given to me for a job a while ago, only
 thing I've ever used it for is to watch sports I can't get on my tv
 antenna).


I finally got a smartphone late last year (I had a couple through much 
of 2012, but those were just loaners for a job - I was *glad* to get rid 
of them at the end).

I'll admit, the (horribly-named) "shazam" program is pretty nice to have 
on hand. But mostly, this smartphone has just been a royal PITA. I did 
grab an incredibly overpriced $4 stylus (anything more than $1 for a 
thin-tipped **stylus** is an outright scam - and this one isn't even 
thin-tipped). That makes it *slightly* less horrible to put up with, but 
that's about it.

One of the main reasons I had gotten this thing was to have internet 
access on the go, but regardless of connection speed, I find it's 
usually *FAR* quicker to just wait until I get home and use a REAL computer.

It's really too bad though, I know for a fact pocket computers CAN work 
very well - my PalmOS devices back in college were a testament to that. 
But these modern Android/iOS smartphones are just utterly useless. 
You're better off with just a flipphone (if not landline) and way to get 
back home to your own real computer.

Something like the Surface Pro could actually be good though, if it 
wasn't running Win8, cost less, had sufficient IO ports (with no idiotic 
connector dongles), and actually had a keyboard available that didn't 
suck. (There seems to be a rule that all mobile keyboards manufactured 
after about 2005 MUST be terrible. Heck, you can barely find ones with 
halfway-decent *arrow keys* anymore, let alone realistically usable 
home/end/etc (which mobiles have never had). Screw number pads, I just 
want a proper "middle" keyboard section.)
Jun 02 2014
next sibling parent "Wyatt" <wyatt.epp gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 18:19:30 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 (There seems to be a rule that all mobile keyboards 
 manufactured after about 2005 MUST be terrible. Heck, you can 
 barely find ones with halfway-decent *arrow keys* anymore, let 
 alone realistically usable home/end/etc (which mobiles have 
 never had). Screw number pads, I just want a proper "middle" 
 keyboard section.)


It won't be the fastest kid on the block, but I highly recommend 
grabbing a Thinkpad from before Lenovo decided to viciously 
crater the entire brand with "modern" crap.  IIRC, the T420 and 
its contemporaries were the last ones to have a good keyboard; 
T430 and onward are chiclet garbage.

-Wyatt
Jun 02 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 18:19:30 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 One of the main reasons I had gotten this thing was to have 
 internet access on the go, but regardless of connection speed, 
 I find it's usually *FAR* quicker to just wait until I get home 
 and use a REAL computer.


Yeah, my view is things can almost always just wait.


 Something like the Surface Pro could actually be good though, 
 if it wasn't running Win8, cost less, had sufficient IO ports 
 (with no idiotic connector dongles),


Yeah, my brother has one of those and it didn't look half bad to 
me, but still, meh, work can wait till I'm back in the office!
Jun 02 2014
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/2/2014 7:24 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 On Monday, 2 June 2014 at 18:19:30 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Something like the Surface Pro could actually be good though, if it
 wasn't running Win8, cost less, had sufficient IO ports (with no
 idiotic connector dongles),


 Yeah, my brother has one of those and it didn't look half bad to me, but
 still, meh, work can wait till I'm back in the office!


A friend of mine (not a techie) has a (non-Pro) Surface and loves it. 
Interestingly, the main thing he loves about it is the fact that it has 
a real Windows desktop (well, more or less), which is exactly the main 
thing mobile devices have been obsessively trying to avoid (because 
Apple made them think they all have to).

Win8 aside, the Surface's basic idea is exactly what I always thought 
tablets should be: Usable as a tablet, but with a real UI, USB, and a 
flip-out keyboard that can also fold over to protect the screen. It's 
just what makes sense. Too bad it has some deal-breaking problems in the 
details. Oh well, at least it's a step in the right direction though, 
unlike iDroid. What we really need is something that hits the sweet-spot 
between 1. traditional laptop (plus optional dock), 2. traditional 
tablet and 3. netbook.
Jun 02 2014
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 6/2/2014 6:58 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 A friend of mine (not a techie) has a (non-Pro) Surface and loves it.


I had a look at the new Pro Surface at the Microsoft store yesterday. They've 
fixed the screen, meaning it's much sharper and more readable. I don't know why 
this feature isn't promoted more.

I also visited the Apple store. The laptops, while having excellent displays, 
still don't have touch screens. Touch isn't of much use on a desktop, but I
find 
it adds a lot with a laptop.
Jun 03 2014
parent "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Tuesday, 3 June 2014 at 18:05:54 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 6/2/2014 6:58 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 A friend of mine (not a techie) has a (non-Pro) Surface and 
 loves it.


 I had a look at the new Pro Surface at the Microsoft store 
 yesterday. They've fixed the screen, meaning it's much sharper 
 and more readable. I don't know why this feature isn't promoted 
 more.

 I also visited the Apple store. The laptops, while having 
 excellent displays, still don't have touch screens. Touch isn't 
 of much use on a desktop, but I find it adds a lot with a 
 laptop.


They want to sell their iPads and iPhones. I have a laptop with 
touch screen now. It's convenient when you have it on your lap 
and don't need to navigate the cursor with the trackpad. Just 
touch it like a baby would. (Excellent for clicking ads away when 
on youtube!)

I guess Apple will finally have touch screen laptops too, as soon 
as they realize that a lot of people prefer other brands to 
Apple, because of this. And of course, then it will be _the 
revolution of the century_! :-))))
Jun 04 2014
prev sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 02/06/14 20:19, Nick Sabalausky wrote:


 One of the main reasons I had gotten this thing was to have internet
 access on the go, but regardless of connection speed, I find it's
 usually *FAR* quicker to just wait until I get home and use a REAL
 computer.


I prefer using a real computer as well but I like having a smart phone 
to have something to do when I go to and from work on the subway. Like 
reading these newsgroups or reading Adam's new book. Although I never 
post on the newsgroups using the phone.

I'm also listening to music on the phone. It's also nice to be able to 
check the timetable for buses and the subway when you're on the go. Or 
have access to a map when necessary.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Jun 02 2014
next sibling parent "Meta" <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 3 June 2014 at 06:55:15 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I prefer using a real computer as well but I like having a 
 smart phone to have something to do when I go to and from work 
 on the subway. Like reading these newsgroups or reading Adam's 
 new book. Although I never post on the newsgroups using the 
 phone.

 I'm also listening to music on the phone. It's also nice to be 
 able to check the timetable for buses and the subway when 
 you're on the go. Or have access to a map when necessary.


Yes, I most often use my phone as a super-mobile computer for 
browsing websites, checking Twitter, etc., rather than calling or 
texting people. This somewhat surprised me, but now it's 
invaluable.
Jun 03 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Tobias Pankrath" <tobias pankrath.net> writes:
 I'm also listening to music on the phone. It's also nice to be 
 able to check the timetable for buses and the subway when 
 you're on the go. Or have access to a map when necessary.



Jeah, I always get lost. Improves local knowledge though.
Jun 03 2014
parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 6/3/2014 5:19 AM, Tobias Pankrath wrote:

 Jeah, I always get lost. Improves local knowledge though.


An odd effect I've noticed is if I use a GPS navigator, I don't learn the city, 
or even the route.
Jun 03 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 6/2/2014 11:55 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I'm also listening to music on the phone.


I've damaged my ears from years of loud engines. I've read that most hearing 
damage comes from gunshots, rock concerts, and earphones. When using earphones 
in public, one tends to turn up the volume to drown out the ambient noise. 
Worrying about that, I just don't use earphones in public.

The music is on 24/7 at home, so I don't miss not having it elsewhere.

But having an ereader has made traveling far more pleasant. Even long airline 
flights are much less of an endurance test when I've got my library with me.

BTW, for you young fellers, hearing damage shows up years or even decades after 
the insult. The doc told me it was much like grass - walk on it a few times,
and 
the grass isn't affected. Walk on it constantly, and you kill it.
Jun 03 2014
next sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 03/06/14 20:14, Walter Bright wrote:


 I've damaged my ears from years of loud engines. I've read that most
 hearing damage comes from gunshots, rock concerts, and earphones. When
 using earphones in public, one tends to turn up the volume to drown out
 the ambient noise. Worrying about that, I just don't use earphones in
 public.


I avoid turning up the volume. I basically have the same volume I would 
have in a room without any other noises, just a bit louder.


 The music is on 24/7 at home, so I don't miss not having it elsewhere.


I can't have music on at work and I don't like to wear headphones any 
longer periods. Although I do have music on a home, as long as I don't 
disturb anyone.


 But having an ereader has made traveling far more pleasant. Even long
 airline flights are much less of an endurance test when I've got my
 library with me.


Absolutely. When I go on any longer trips, when I have a baggage anyway, 
I usually bring my tablet along as well.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Jun 03 2014
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 6/3/2014 11:38 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I can't have music on at work


I understand that. But can you have it on at a barely perceptible volume at
your 
desk? That's usually enough for me.
Jun 04 2014
next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 09:30:32AM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On 6/3/2014 11:38 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

I can't have music on at work


 
 I understand that. But can you have it on at a barely perceptible
 volume at your desk? That's usually enough for me.


I find that music distracts my ability to think clearly, especially when
coding or solving a complex algorithmic / mathematical problem. Oddly
enough, non-intelligible background noise actually helps (probably
because it drowns out other distracting noises, like background talking,
etc.).


T

-- 
Real Programmers use "cat > a.out".
Jun 04 2014
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 6/4/2014 11:36 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 09:30:32AM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
wrote:

 On 6/3/2014 11:38 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I can't have music on at work


 I understand that. But can you have it on at a barely perceptible
 volume at your desk? That's usually enough for me.


 I find that music distracts my ability to think clearly, especially when
 coding or solving a complex algorithmic / mathematical problem.


True for me, too. Which is why I prefer ambient music at low volume when
coding, 
and sometimes even then I'll turn it off when faced with a difficult problem.
Jun 04 2014
parent reply "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 11:51:04AM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On 6/4/2014 11:36 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:

On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 09:30:32AM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:

On 6/3/2014 11:38 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

I can't have music on at work


I understand that. But can you have it on at a barely perceptible
volume at your desk? That's usually enough for me.


I find that music distracts my ability to think clearly, especially
when coding or solving a complex algorithmic / mathematical problem.


 
 True for me, too. Which is why I prefer ambient music at low volume
 when coding, and sometimes even then I'll turn it off when faced with
 a difficult problem.


It's strange, I find that even ambient music distracts me, yet the loud
noise of an occasional passing train doesn't. Similarly, even whispers
will distract me, but birds chirping, trees rustling, etc., don't. It's
something about intelligible sounds that engage my brain somehow, that
non-intelligible sounds don't have. So far, I haven't found anybody else
who experiences the same thing.

Paradoxically, when I'm trying to focus while there are lots of other
distractions around me (or psychological anxieties), I find music via
headphones helpful. Maybe because the isolation removes more
distractions than it adds, I don't know.


T

-- 
Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals could believe them. -- George
Orwell
Jun 04 2014
next sibling parent "Alex_Dovhal" <alex_dovhal somewhere.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 19:04:19 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:

 It's strange, I find that even ambient music distracts me, yet 
 the loud
 noise of an occasional passing train doesn't. Similarly, even 
 whispers
 will distract me, but birds chirping, trees rustling, etc., 
 don't. It's


Have you tried this program http://www.umopit.ru/AuraEng.htm
it plays forest sounds - birds, noise, rain, etc. at random order
very naturally.
Jun 04 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2014-06-04 21:02, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:


 It's strange, I find that even ambient music distracts me, yet the loud
 noise of an occasional passing train doesn't. Similarly, even whispers
 will distract me, but birds chirping, trees rustling, etc., don't. It's
 something about intelligible sounds that engage my brain somehow, that
 non-intelligible sounds don't have. So far, I haven't found anybody else
 who experiences the same thing.


Then you have now problem listening to modern pop music ;)

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Jun 05 2014
next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 11:49:38AM +0200, Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d
wrote:

 On 2014-06-04 21:02, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
 

It's strange, I find that even ambient music distracts me, yet the
loud noise of an occasional passing train doesn't. Similarly, even
whispers will distract me, but birds chirping, trees rustling, etc.,
don't. It's something about intelligible sounds that engage my brain
somehow, that non-intelligible sounds don't have. So far, I haven't
found anybody else who experiences the same thing.


 
 Then you have now problem listening to modern pop music ;)


[...]

Ha!

Though, truth be told, I can't stand modern pop music.


T

-- 
Leather is waterproof.  Ever see a cow with an umbrella?
Jun 05 2014
parent reply "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 14:11:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Ha!

 Though, truth be told, I can't stand modern pop music.


I always go for metal, goa trance and alike. That keep my lizard
brain quiet while my higher cognitive capacity are at work.

Right now Gamma Ray - Powerplant
Jun 05 2014
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/5/2014 6:08 PM, deadalnix wrote:

 On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 14:11:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
 Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Ha!

 Though, truth be told, I can't stand modern pop music.




My (completely unfounded) belief is that nobody *truly* likes that stuff. ;)


 I always go for metal, goa trance and alike. That keep my lizard
 brain quiet while my higher cognitive capacity are at work.

 Right now Gamma Ray - Powerplant


Yea, I'm similar. It seems kinda weird (even to me), but the heavier, 
faster, louder stuff often helps me stay "in the zone". If I don't have 
music, or if I play smooth jazz (which I do normally quite like), then 
my mind will start to wander.

My coding music lately has been anywhere between not-entirely-mainstream 
rock/pop/electronic to industrial metal. Like Kotoko, KMFDM, Thrill Kill 
Kult, Manson, Crystal Method, Queensryche, Ohgr/Skinny Puppy, Daft 
Punk's latest album, etc. Largely stuff that would probably make most 
people go "How does that not distract you?" Somehow it manages to keep 
me from distracting myself.
Jun 05 2014
next sibling parent reply "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 02:21:45 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 6/5/2014 6:08 PM, deadalnix wrote:

 On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 14:11:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
 Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Ha!

 Though, truth be told, I can't stand modern pop music.




 My (completely unfounded) belief is that nobody *truly* likes 
 that stuff. ;)


That is not unfounded.

When you ship music via hardware like CD, having a lot of choice
cost money. So you need to have a large localized public (as
nobody will drive 200km to buy a disc).

As a result, the most economically efficient music is the not the
one that some people like the most, but the one that people
dislike the least.

The same goes for broadcast medias like TV.

Obviously, the internet era tend to change that quite a bit and
people tend to be more selective over time.


 I always go for metal, goa trance and alike. That keep my 
 lizard
 brain quiet while my higher cognitive capacity are at work.

 Right now Gamma Ray - Powerplant


 Yea, I'm similar. It seems kinda weird (even to me), but the 
 heavier, faster, louder stuff often helps me stay "in the 
 zone". If I don't have music, or if I play smooth jazz (which I 
 do normally quite like), then my mind will start to wander.

 My coding music lately has been anywhere between 
 not-entirely-mainstream rock/pop/electronic to industrial 
 metal. Like Kotoko, KMFDM, Thrill Kill Kult, Manson, Crystal 
 Method, Queensryche, Ohgr/Skinny Puppy, Daft Punk's latest 
 album, etc. Largely stuff that would probably make most people 
 go "How does that not distract you?" Somehow it manages to keep 
 me from distracting myself.


Distracting myself. Yes, that is exactly it :D
Jun 05 2014
parent "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 04:02:22 UTC, deadalnix wrote:

 On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 02:21:45 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 6/5/2014 6:08 PM, deadalnix wrote:

 On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 14:11:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
 Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Ha!

 Though, truth be told, I can't stand modern pop music.




 My (completely unfounded) belief is that nobody *truly* likes 
 that stuff. ;)


 That is not unfounded.

 When you ship music via hardware like CD, having a lot of choice
 cost money. So you need to have a large localized public (as
 nobody will drive 200km to buy a disc).

 As a result, the most economically efficient music is the not 
 the
 one that some people like the most, but the one that people
 dislike the least.

 The same goes for broadcast medias like TV.

 Obviously, the internet era tend to change that quite a bit and
 people tend to be more selective over time.


True, true. People were used to drinking shit beer. Now that 
there is a craft beer revolution and people _do_ have a choice, 
they choose the good stuff over the big standard brands.

It is true, in most cases it is not "it's good, I like it", it's 
"ok, it's the best of the worst, that's why I buy it". Funny 
enough, some people defend shit, only because they're used to it. 
Amazing.


 I always go for metal, goa trance and alike. That keep my 
 lizard
 brain quiet while my higher cognitive capacity are at work.

 Right now Gamma Ray - Powerplant


 Yea, I'm similar. It seems kinda weird (even to me), but the 
 heavier, faster, louder stuff often helps me stay "in the 
 zone". If I don't have music, or if I play smooth jazz (which 
 I do normally quite like), then my mind will start to wander.

 My coding music lately has been anywhere between 
 not-entirely-mainstream rock/pop/electronic to industrial 
 metal. Like Kotoko, KMFDM, Thrill Kill Kult, Manson, Crystal 
 Method, Queensryche, Ohgr/Skinny Puppy, Daft Punk's latest 
 album, etc. Largely stuff that would probably make most people 
 go "How does that not distract you?" Somehow it manages to 
 keep me from distracting myself.


 Distracting myself. Yes, that is exactly it :D
Jun 06 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Kagamin" <spam here.lot> writes:
On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 02:21:45 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 6/5/2014 6:08 PM, deadalnix wrote:

 On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 14:11:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
 Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Ha!

 Though, truth be told, I can't stand modern pop music.




 My (completely unfounded) belief is that nobody *truly* likes 
 that stuff. ;)


Why so? I was very impressed, how lyrical is synchronicity: 
http://youtu.be/Frh6-qHVaiE
Jun 07 2014
next sibling parent reply "Meta" <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 7 June 2014 at 19:53:36 UTC, Kagamin wrote:

 On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 02:21:45 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 6/5/2014 6:08 PM, deadalnix wrote:

 On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 14:11:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
 Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Ha!

 Though, truth be told, I can't stand modern pop music.




 My (completely unfounded) belief is that nobody *truly* likes 
 that stuff. ;)


 Why so? I was very impressed, how lyrical is synchronicity: 
 http://youtu.be/Frh6-qHVaiE


When most people say "modern pop music", I doubt they mean J-Pop.
Jun 07 2014
parent reply "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 7 June 2014 at 20:34:37 UTC, Meta wrote:

 On Saturday, 7 June 2014 at 19:53:36 UTC, Kagamin wrote:

 On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 02:21:45 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 6/5/2014 6:08 PM, deadalnix wrote:

 On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 14:11:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
 Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Ha!

 Though, truth be told, I can't stand modern pop music.




 My (completely unfounded) belief is that nobody *truly* likes 
 that stuff. ;)


 Why so? I was very impressed, how lyrical is synchronicity: 
 http://youtu.be/Frh6-qHVaiE


 When most people say "modern pop music", I doubt they mean 
 J-Pop.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCPzLNqYe1U
Jun 07 2014
parent "Meta" <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 7 June 2014 at 20:49:03 UTC, deadalnix wrote:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCPzLNqYe1U


I'm aware of BabyMetal, but they're of course not pop, and not 
your typical band. I think that BabyMetal is something that could 
only happen in Japan.
Jun 07 2014
prev sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/7/2014 3:53 PM, Kagamin wrote:

 On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 02:21:45 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 6/5/2014 6:08 PM, deadalnix wrote:

 On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 14:11:32 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
 Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Ha!

 Though, truth be told, I can't stand modern pop music.




 My (completely unfounded) belief is that nobody *truly* likes that
 stuff. ;)


 Why so? I was very impressed, how lyrical is synchronicity:
 http://youtu.be/Frh6-qHVaiE


Well, I'm in the US, JPop is *far* from mainstream here (a major 
subculture at most). Anime opening/closings usually are very, very good 
IMO. Haven't heard that one before though, very good, sounds similar to 
Kotoko with a bit of a Yoko Kanno flair (specifically thinking of the 
Ghost in the Shell SAC opening, which IIRC, Kanno-san was involved in.)

That's also a great example of why IMO Hollywood and some of the newer 
western-style games often do a lousy job in music - the harder they try, 
the worse they do IMO. Aside from the one notable exception of Symphony 
of the Night, I can't stand orchestrated scores. They just sound generic 
at best. Great example of good music selection: The background music in 
the opening battle scene from first episode of Madoka Magica. Absolutely 
puts hollywood (and games like Uncharted 3 and Mario Galaxy) to shame.

Anyway, I'm completely geeking out now, so I'll stop ;)
Jun 08 2014
parent reply "Kagamin" <spam here.lot> writes:
On Sunday, 8 June 2014 at 17:04:34 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 That's also a great example of why IMO Hollywood and some of 
 the newer western-style games often do a lousy job in music - 
 the harder they try, the worse they do IMO. Aside from the one 
 notable exception of Symphony of the Night, I can't stand 
 orchestrated scores. They just sound generic at best. Great 
 example of good music selection: The background music in the 
 opening battle scene from first episode of Madoka Magica. 
 Absolutely puts hollywood (and games like Uncharted 3 and Mario 
 Galaxy) to shame.


That's "Magia" :) There are also interesting fan translations: 
http://youtu.be/lu98k5vVP-Y http://youtu.be/b2Chwj5JEww

On Monday, 9 June 2014 at 16:37:18 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 I like the clip-style, they don't fall off, they let me still 
 hear what's going on around me, and they don't feel like ear 
 tampons.

 Only problem is it's impossible to find good clip-ons. *All* 
 the Sony clip-ons have horrible sound quality and they're ugly 
 to boot. The Koss ones are the *only* ones I've ever found that 
 actually sound decent, but they invariably stop working within 
 a few months, and warranty replacements take several weeks and 
 cost $6-$9 each time.


http://www.usa.philips.com/c-p/SHE2650_28/-/overview - bought 
these once and they work for years for me. Dunno, maybe I'm just 
accurate or not picky about sound. Is there a reason why 
headphones should break? Well, only cushions are tearing apart, 
probably not designed to work so long.
Jun 10 2014
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/10/2014 5:14 PM, Kagamin wrote:

 On Sunday, 8 June 2014 at 17:04:34 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 That's also a great example of why IMO Hollywood and some of the newer
 western-style games often do a lousy job in music - the harder they
 try, the worse they do IMO. Aside from the one notable exception of
 Symphony of the Night, I can't stand orchestrated scores. They just
 sound generic at best. Great example of good music selection: The
 background music in the opening battle scene from first episode of
 Madoka Magica. Absolutely puts hollywood (and games like Uncharted 3
 and Mario Galaxy) to shame.


 That's "Magia" :)


I'll be dammed, I can't believe I *never* noticed that song in the 
opening battle was the same as the second closing. I consider Madoka 
Magica's second closing sequence (anim + music) to easily be one of the 
best theme sequences ever made. Gives me chills every time I watch it, 
it's that good:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Eb4ONZw01Y

(It'll have to be downloaded with DownloadHelper or youtube-dl to hear 
the audio with it, amazingly they only force-muted their own flash 
player, not the AV stream itself :) )

Not only that, but it's also amazing in that it provides a perfect 
overview of the show, while never giving anything away...and yet it's 
for a show which very little *can* be said without spoilers. You can say 
"Turns the magical girl genre completely on it's ear", "Amazing 
production values throughout", and that's about all. And yet, that 
closing alone spoils nothing while summing up the show perfectly.

Point being, all that admiration I have for both that second closing and 
the initial opening battle, and I *still* never noticed they were the 
same song! Don't I feel like the perfect fool now! ;)


 There are also interesting fan translations:
 http://youtu.be/lu98k5vVP-Y http://youtu.be/b2Chwj5JEww


Those are impressively well done for translations. Although I do still 
maintain that music, including Magia, tends to sound best in Japanese ;)

While I often like watching dubs (they've generally gotten a lot better 
than they used to be), with music the English translations just don't 
sound as good no matter how well they're done. Maybe it's just my 
familiarity with english, but I like to think it's the aesthetics of the 
languages themselves...even if I'm only fooling myself about it.


 On Monday, 9 June 2014 at 16:37:18 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 I like the clip-style, they don't fall off, they let me still hear
 what's going on around me, and they don't feel like ear tampons.

 Only problem is it's impossible to find good clip-ons. *All* the Sony
 clip-ons have horrible sound quality and they're ugly to boot. The
 Koss ones are the *only* ones I've ever found that actually sound
 decent, but they invariably stop working within a few months, and
 warranty replacements take several weeks and cost $6-$9 each time.


 http://www.usa.philips.com/c-p/SHE2650_28/-/overview - bought these once
 and they work for years for me. Dunno, maybe I'm just accurate or not
 picky about sound.


Yea, I dunno, it hard to say anymore.

On one hand, I've never considered myself an audiophile, and I've never 
valued investing several $100's into a sound system (usually the $$$ 
ones just sound louder rather than "better" to me - especially Bose's 
in-store demo). I've been happy with the sound quality from my $100 
14-year-old disc-changer stereo, and $20 Koss headphones (back when the 
latter still worked).

But OTOH, I've found myself complaining about sound quality from 
headphones that other people noticed nothing wrong with. And last time I 
did an indie game (ages ago) I was very surprised how much difference I 
noticed (even on ordinary speakers) when encoding the music as 128kbps 
MP3, as opposed to 128kbps Vorbis and 320kbps MP3. (Wouldv'e used a 
Vorbis-sampled sequencing/tracker format instead, but the music guy's 
tools didn't easily support anything like that. Ended up going with 
straight Vorbis at a low bitrate. Wasn't too terrible a compromise, 
considering connection speeds back then.) There's been other times I've 
been bugged by a sound issue some people would've ignored and kept 
fiddling with it.

So I dunno, maybe I am an audiophile and just don't know it ;)


 Is there a reason why headphones should break? Well,
 only cushions are tearing apart, probably not designed to work so long.


Beats me. Got that Koss one, worked great for some years and then 
suddenly, for no apparent reason, complete silence out of one side. 
Dead. And then every replacement unit: No waring, one side dead within 
about 6 months. Ugh. Irritated the hell out of me *because* these $25-35 
Koss ones sounded so much better than any other clip-style I could find, 
or even *anything* in a remotely similar price range.
Jun 10 2014
parent reply "Kagamin" <spam here.lot> writes:
On Wednesday, 11 June 2014 at 03:56:06 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Point being, all that admiration I have for both that second 
 closing and the initial opening battle, and I *still* never 
 noticed they were the same song! Don't I feel like the perfect 
 fool now! ;)


The battle theme starts as an off-vocal version, which sounds 
considerably different to the vocal version. Maybe the vocal has 
a different rhythm.


 While I often like watching dubs (they've generally gotten a 
 lot better than they used to be), with music the English 
 translations just don't sound as good no matter how well 
 they're done. Maybe it's just my familiarity with english, but 
 I like to think it's the aesthetics of the languages 
 themselves...even if I'm only fooling myself about it.


Western languages being non-syllabary do sound discontinuous, and 
Japanese has an advantage in its strict syllabary structure - it 
sounds very smooth. It makes it even more interesting, how the 
translators try to get the most out of their languages and 
compensate or work around the warts. On the other hand, german 
dub of Star Wars has the best version of Darth Vader ever.


 And last time I did an indie game (ages ago) I was very 
 surprised how much difference I noticed (even on ordinary 
 speakers) when encoding the music as 128kbps MP3, as opposed to 
 128kbps Vorbis and 320kbps MP3.


I can only hear a difference when comparing them side by side. 
When taken separately, I can't guess the bitrate.
Jun 11 2014
parent reply "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 11 June 2014 at 07:30:41 UTC, Kagamin wrote:

 And last time I did an indie game (ages ago) I was very 
 surprised how much difference I noticed (even on ordinary 
 speakers) when encoding the music as 128kbps MP3, as opposed 
 to 128kbps Vorbis and 320kbps MP3.


 I can only hear a difference when comparing them side by side. 
 When taken separately, I can't guess the bitrate.


Not to be "that audiophile guy", but the big differences in 
quality are most audible in the high frequencies. More lossy 
compression means messed up highs, which are then normally 
attenuated to some degree to cover it up.
Jun 11 2014
parent "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Wednesday, 11 June 2014 at 08:15:00 UTC, John Colvin wrote:

 On Wednesday, 11 June 2014 at 07:30:41 UTC, Kagamin wrote:

 And last time I did an indie game (ages ago) I was very 
 surprised how much difference I noticed (even on ordinary 
 speakers) when encoding the music as 128kbps MP3, as opposed 
 to 128kbps Vorbis and 320kbps MP3.


 I can only hear a difference when comparing them side by side. 
 When taken separately, I can't guess the bitrate.


 Not to be "that audiophile guy", but the big differences in 
 quality are most audible in the high frequencies. More lossy 
 compression means messed up highs, which are then normally 
 attenuated to some degree to cover it up.


Some audio stuff can be really bad, especially when digitally 
edited. On the other hand, if you're really into music, it 
doesn't really matter. I would listen to the shittiest bootleg 
live recordings of my favorite bands and enjoy the music all the 
same. You always hear something new.
Jun 11 2014
prev sibling parent reply "Kagamin" <spam here.lot> writes:
On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 02:21:45 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 My coding music lately has been anywhere between 
 not-entirely-mainstream rock/pop/electronic to industrial 
 metal. Like Kotoko, KMFDM, Thrill Kill Kult, Manson


Used to listen Manson too, though it felt destructive, mind- and 
soul-destructive, didn't like those effects, positive art works 
much better for me.
Jun 07 2014
parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/7/2014 4:12 PM, Kagamin wrote:

 On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 02:21:45 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 My coding music lately has been anywhere between
 not-entirely-mainstream rock/pop/electronic to industrial metal. Like
 Kotoko, KMFDM, Thrill Kill Kult, Manson


 Used to listen Manson too, though it felt destructive, mind- and
 soul-destructive, didn't like those effects, positive art works much
 better for me.


Heh, it's kinda fits my non-conformist streak and makes me chuckle ;) 
It's just very "F You", which I find satisfying, gives me a recharge.

Anyway, I don't often listen much of Antichrist Superstar or Holywood 
anymore, and was never into much of the earlier stuff (a lot of 
pre-Superstar tracks were just kinda filler IMO. Some exceptions, 
though). I've been going more for the "Metal Pop" albums: Mechanical 
Animals, Golden Age of Grotesque, and Eat Me Drink Me. Plus the couple 
more "pop" tracks off High End of Low: Wow and Arma***geddon. (Not so 
coincidentally, most of that is the stuff Tim Skold was involved in. 
Dude's an unsung living legend.)
Jun 08 2014
prev sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 6/5/2014 2:49 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2014-06-04 21:02, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:


 It's strange, I find that even ambient music distracts me, yet the loud
 noise of an occasional passing train doesn't. Similarly, even whispers
 will distract me, but birds chirping, trees rustling, etc., don't. It's
 something about intelligible sounds that engage my brain somehow, that
 non-intelligible sounds don't have. So far, I haven't found anybody else
 who experiences the same thing.


 Then you have now problem listening to modern pop music ;)


I've heard that observation about modern music when I was a kid - "There's a 
bathroom on the right!" - "Wrapped up like a douche!" - and most famously, 
"Louie Louie":

    http://www.louielouie.net/11-fbi.htm

Never mind that I could never make out the words in opera, either. My mother 
once tried to inculcate me with culture by taking me to the opera. When I 
complained that I couldn't understand any of the lyrics, she explained that
that 
was unnecessary, as one should already know the story.
Jun 05 2014
parent reply "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 10:07:59AM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On 6/5/2014 2:49 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

On 2014-06-04 21:02, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:


It's strange, I find that even ambient music distracts me, yet the
loud noise of an occasional passing train doesn't. Similarly, even
whispers will distract me, but birds chirping, trees rustling, etc.,
don't. It's something about intelligible sounds that engage my brain
somehow, that non-intelligible sounds don't have. So far, I haven't
found anybody else who experiences the same thing.


Then you have now problem listening to modern pop music ;)


 
 I've heard that observation about modern music when I was a kid -
 "There's a bathroom on the right!" - "Wrapped up like a douche!" - and
 most famously, "Louie Louie":
 
    http://www.louielouie.net/11-fbi.htm
 
 Never mind that I could never make out the words in opera, either. My
 mother once tried to inculcate me with culture by taking me to the
 opera. When I complained that I couldn't understand any of the lyrics,
 she explained that that was unnecessary, as one should already know
 the story.


I'm a classical music aficionado, but I hate opera. It bores me to death
and grates my ears with exaggerated, unnatural pronunciations of words
that make it basically unintelligible, and distracts from the real
stuff, that is, the music. :P  I don't like vocal music; give me an
instrumental any day.


T

-- 
There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.
Jun 05 2014
parent reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
Second best opera ever:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbGw3A9Dg-Q

lololol

(first best opera? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEuf9ZSJrdg oh 
yeah ff6!)
Jun 05 2014
next sibling parent reply "Meta" <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 17:45:00 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 Second best opera ever:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbGw3A9Dg-Q

 lololol

 (first best opera? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEuf9ZSJrdg 
 oh yeah ff6!)


There is a version of this with vocals that has been done several 
times by the Royal Stockholm Philharmonic Orchestra, the World 
Festival Symphony Orchestra, and  the Kanagawa Philharmonic 
Orchestra for the Distant Worlds recordings, and they are 
extremely well done.
Jun 05 2014
parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 20:29:14 UTC, Meta wrote:

 There is a version of this with vocals that has been done 
 several times by the Royal Stockholm Philharmonic Orchestra, 
 the World Festival Symphony Orchestra, and  the Kanagawa 
 Philharmonic Orchestra for the Distant Worlds recordings, and 
 they are extremely well done.


Cool. I've heard several versions of the live one but always love 
more.
Jun 05 2014
prev sibling parent Bruno Medeiros <bruno.do.medeiros+dng gmail.com> writes:
On 05/06/2014 18:44, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 (first best opera? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEuf9ZSJrdg oh yeah
 ff6!)


Lol. I was never a big fan of FF 6, or FF in general, but admittedly 
that opera scene was great, perhaps even my favorite FF moment! (I only 
played 3 FFs though)

-- 
Bruno Medeiros
https://twitter.com/brunodomedeiros
Jun 06 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent Bruno Medeiros <bruno.do.medeiros+dng gmail.com> writes:
On 04/06/2014 20:02, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 11:51:04AM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
wrote:

 On 6/4/2014 11:36 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 09:30:32AM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
wrote:

 On 6/3/2014 11:38 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I can't have music on at work


 I understand that. But can you have it on at a barely perceptible
 volume at your desk? That's usually enough for me.


 I find that music distracts my ability to think clearly, especially
 when coding or solving a complex algorithmic / mathematical problem.


 True for me, too. Which is why I prefer ambient music at low volume
 when coding, and sometimes even then I'll turn it off when faced with
 a difficult problem.


 It's strange, I find that even ambient music distracts me, yet the loud
 noise of an occasional passing train doesn't. Similarly, even whispers
 will distract me, but birds chirping, trees rustling, etc., don't. It's
 something about intelligible sounds that engage my brain somehow, that
 non-intelligible sounds don't have. So far, I haven't found anybody else
 who experiences the same thing.


Have you tried these?
http://www.di.fm/cosmicdowntempo
http://www.di.fm/spacemusic
http://www.di.fm/ambient

They are my favorites when I am coding, they are relaxing in a way, but 
are not distracting cognitively.


If I already figured out a problem, and are now just on a execution 
phase (writing code - but no major cognitive/creative work required), I 
often switch to more energetic styles:

http://www.di.fm/psychill
http://www.di.fm/goapsy
http://www.di.fm/classictrance


-- 
Bruno Medeiros
https://twitter.com/brunodomedeiros
Jun 06 2014
prev sibling parent "John" <john.joyus gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 19:04:19 UTC, H. S. Teoh via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:

 It's strange, I find that even ambient music distracts me, yet 
 the loud noise of an occasional passing train doesn't. 
 Similarly, even whispers will distract me, but birds chirping, 
 trees rustling, etc., don't.



 It's something about intelligible sounds that engage my brain 
 somehow, that non-intelligible sounds don't have. So far, I 
 haven't found anybody else who experiences the same thing.


Me too! I think it's pretty much the default human nature through 
evaluation! We keep filtering / ignoring the usual noises so that 
we can pick up on new ones, just like our noses ignoring an 
existing smell to be able to recognize a new smell.

Similarly, it is easy to hear own name despite all the noise in a 
crowded room.
Jun 06 2014
prev sibling parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2014-06-04 18:30, Walter Bright wrote:


 I understand that. But can you have it on at a barely perceptible volume
 at your desk? That's usually enough for me.


I don't know, I haven't tried that. I don't know what they others will 
think.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Jun 04 2014
prev sibling parent reply "SomeDude" <lolilol mailmetrash.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 3 June 2014 at 18:14:29 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 6/2/2014 11:55 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I'm also listening to music on the phone.


 I've damaged my ears from years of loud engines. I've read that 
 most hearing damage comes from gunshots, rock concerts, and 
 earphones. When using earphones in public, one tends to turn up 
 the volume to drown out the ambient noise. Worrying about that, 
 I just don't use earphones in public.


You want in ear isolating earphones. Basically earplugs that play 
music. Since the ambiant noise is greatly reduced, you don't need 
to play loud at all. Some brands isolate more or less well. 
Etymotics isolate very well.
Jun 08 2014
parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 6/8/14, 10:46 AM, SomeDude wrote:

 On Tuesday, 3 June 2014 at 18:14:29 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 6/2/2014 11:55 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I'm also listening to music on the phone.


 I've damaged my ears from years of loud engines. I've read that most
 hearing damage comes from gunshots, rock concerts, and earphones. When
 using earphones in public, one tends to turn up the volume to drown
 out the ambient noise. Worrying about that, I just don't use earphones
 in public.


 You want in ear isolating earphones. Basically earplugs that play music.
 Since the ambiant noise is greatly reduced, you don't need to play loud
 at all. Some brands isolate more or less well. Etymotics isolate very well.


Yah. One well-known fact about Facebook is it has an open layout which 
can be quite distracting. One less-known fact is it makes high quality 
headphones (both in-ear (Klipsch) and over-the-ear (Sennheiser)) 
available to all employees for free. -- Andrei
Jun 08 2014
next sibling parent reply "safety0ff" <safety0ff.dev gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 8 June 2014 at 13:50:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Yah. One well-known fact about Facebook is it has an open 
 layout which can be quite distracting. One less-known fact is 
 it makes high quality headphones (both in-ear (Klipsch) and 
 over-the-ear (Sennheiser)) available to all employees for free. 
 -- Andrei


Out of curiosity: are visual distractions also an issue in 
facebook's open layout? (e.g. motion & bright lights in 
peripheral vision)

If so, what is the mitigation strategy?
Jun 08 2014
parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 6/8/14, 7:47 AM, safety0ff wrote:

 On Sunday, 8 June 2014 at 13:50:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Yah. One well-known fact about Facebook is it has an open layout which
 can be quite distracting. One less-known fact is it makes high quality
 headphones (both in-ear (Klipsch) and over-the-ear (Sennheiser))
 available to all employees for free. -- Andrei


 Out of curiosity: are visual distractions also an issue in facebook's
 open layout? (e.g. motion & bright lights in peripheral vision)

 If so, what is the mitigation strategy?


Visual distraction is seldom discussed as an issue. Anyhow, there are 
plenty of offices including designated "quiet rooms" that one can sit in 
and work in solitary stretches. -- Andrei
Jun 08 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent "SomeDude" <lolilol mailmetrash.com> writes:
On Sunday, 8 June 2014 at 13:50:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Yah. One well-known fact about Facebook is it has an open 
 layout which can be quite distracting. One less-known fact is 
 it makes high quality headphones (both in-ear (Klipsch) and 
 over-the-ear (Sennheiser)) available to all employees for free. 
 -- Andrei


That is **awesome** !
Jun 09 2014
prev sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/8/2014 9:51 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 6/8/14, 10:46 AM, SomeDude wrote:

 You want in ear isolating earphones. Basically earplugs that play music.
 Since the ambiant noise is greatly reduced, you don't need to play loud
 at all. Some brands isolate more or less well. Etymotics isolate very
 well.




I'll never understand how people can use earbuds. They're so 
uncomfortable, walking around with stuff *inside* your ears. Awkward.

I like the clip-style, they don't fall off, they let me still hear 
what's going on around me, and they don't feel like ear tampons.

Only problem is it's impossible to find good clip-ons. *All* the Sony 
clip-ons have horrible sound quality and they're ugly to boot. The Koss 
ones are the *only* ones I've ever found that actually sound decent, but 
they invariably stop working within a few months, and warranty 
replacements take several weeks and cost $6-$9 each time.


 Yah. One well-known fact about Facebook is it has an open layout


Ouch, and here I'd been starting to think facebook was a good programmer 
workplace ;(

I've programmed in everything from open "warroom" to coffee shop to 
cubicle farm to private office, and I'm confident in stating there is 
*NO* environment more poorly suited to programming than open 
environments. I don't understand how anyone can *ever* get any code 
written or problems solved in such an environment, sound-blocking 
headphones or not. I'd take a cubicle-hell before doing the "open 
environment" thing again. Sounds like they're valuing architectural 
trendiness over practical, appropriate decision-making.


 One less-known fact is it makes high quality
 headphones (both in-ear (Klipsch) and over-the-ear (Sennheiser))
 available to all employees for free. -- Andrei


Well, even high quality headphones are cheaper than proper offices. 
Offering them free seems like the least they could do.
Jun 09 2014
next sibling parent reply "John Colvin" <john.loughran.colvin gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 9 June 2014 at 16:37:18 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 6/8/2014 9:51 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 6/8/14, 10:46 AM, SomeDude wrote:

 You want in ear isolating earphones. Basically earplugs that 
 play music.
 Since the ambiant noise is greatly reduced, you don't need to 
 play loud
 at all. Some brands isolate more or less well. Etymotics 
 isolate very
 well.




 I'll never understand how people can use earbuds. They're so 
 uncomfortable, walking around with stuff *inside* your ears. 
 Awkward.


I initially found that style uncomfortable, but quickly got used 
to it. That said, I almost exclusively use proper headphones 
these days.

A pair of Audio-Technica ATH-m50s is a great buy: accurate sound 
(slight high-end boost but meh, I'll take slight imbalance over 
poor quality any day*), good comfort and hard-wearing. I believe 
they have just released an updated version, but I haven't heard 
much about them.

* Most consumer gear is atrociously inaccurate. They might sound 
"pleasing" for a limited repertoire but having done a fair amount 
of pro-audio I just get frustrated not being able to hear any 
detail. I want to hear the sound as it was intended. Even the 
ATH-m50s are far from perfect, but they're good for the price and 
were at least designed with accuracy in mind.
Jun 09 2014
next sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 6/9/2014 9:57 AM, John Colvin wrote:

 * Most consumer gear is atrociously inaccurate. They might sound "pleasing" for
 a limited repertoire but having done a fair amount of pro-audio I just get
 frustrated not being able to hear any detail. I want to hear the sound as it
was
 intended. Even the ATH-m50s are far from perfect, but they're good for the
price
 and were at least designed with accuracy in mind.


I kinda stopped worrying about that after a couple experiences:

1. In the space of two days, I attended two concerts, and each had a violin 
solo. One was at the opera house, and used no amplification. The other was at 
the Paramount theater, and had a mike attached to the violin and we heard it 
amplified. The no-amp one sounded SO MUCH BETTER. There was just no comparison. 
And Yanni, who performed at the Paramount, could afford the best amplification 
setup. There is no electronic system in existence that can sound like a live 
instrument.

2. I used to be able to hear the difference between cassette tape and vinyl.
Not 
no more. Oh well.


The upshot is, if it sounds reasonable at all I'm good to go with it.
Jun 09 2014
prev sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/9/2014 12:57 PM, John Colvin wrote:

 I initially found that style uncomfortable, but quickly got used to it.
 That said, I almost exclusively use proper headphones these days.

 A pair of Audio-Technica ATH-m50s is a great buy: accurate sound (slight
 high-end boost but meh, I'll take slight imbalance over poor quality any
 day*), good comfort and hard-wearing. I believe they have just released
 an updated version, but I haven't heard much about them.

 * Most consumer gear is atrociously inaccurate. They might sound
 "pleasing" for a limited repertoire but having done a fair amount of
 pro-audio I just get frustrated not being able to hear any detail. I
 want to hear the sound as it was intended. Even the ATH-m50s are far
 from perfect, but they're good for the price and were at least designed
 with accuracy in mind.


Speaking of such things, I've actually been considering that pair Sony 
recently put out aimed at the PS3/PS4. While I generally dislike 
headband and isolating-style headphones (and really dislike the extreme 
unbalancedness of a single non-Y-style cord), the idea of a relatively 
affordable wireless virtual-surround with *hopefully* decent quality is 
appealing (even if the virtual-surround is limited to two specific 
set-top boxes).

Any experience with those ones?

(Although frankly I'm disappointed with how virtual surround is handled 
these days anyway. I had a sound card *over ten years ago* that could do 
virtual surround with *any* headphones, worked very well, but nothing 
ever used it and then the whole concept just disappeared entirely. Until 
now where it seems to exist only as a specific-headset-locked, 
settop-locked perversion of anti-technology. Ugh.)
Jun 09 2014
parent reply "Meta" <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 9 June 2014 at 18:03:54 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 6/9/2014 12:57 PM, John Colvin wrote:

 I initially found that style uncomfortable, but quickly got 
 used to it.
 That said, I almost exclusively use proper headphones these 
 days.

 A pair of Audio-Technica ATH-m50s is a great buy: accurate 
 sound (slight
 high-end boost but meh, I'll take slight imbalance over poor 
 quality any
 day*), good comfort and hard-wearing. I believe they have just 
 released
 an updated version, but I haven't heard much about them.

 * Most consumer gear is atrociously inaccurate. They might 
 sound
 "pleasing" for a limited repertoire but having done a fair 
 amount of
 pro-audio I just get frustrated not being able to hear any 
 detail. I
 want to hear the sound as it was intended. Even the ATH-m50s 
 are far
 from perfect, but they're good for the price and were at least 
 designed
 with accuracy in mind.


 Speaking of such things, I've actually been considering that 
 pair Sony recently put out aimed at the PS3/PS4. While I 
 generally dislike headband and isolating-style headphones (and 
 really dislike the extreme unbalancedness of a single 
 non-Y-style cord), the idea of a relatively affordable wireless 
 virtual-surround with *hopefully* decent quality is appealing 
 (even if the virtual-surround is limited to two specific 
 set-top boxes).

 Any experience with those ones?

 (Although frankly I'm disappointed with how virtual surround is 
 handled these days anyway. I had a sound card *over ten years 
 ago* that could do virtual surround with *any* headphones, 
 worked very well, but nothing ever used it and then the whole 
 concept just disappeared entirely. Until now where it seems to 
 exist only as a specific-headset-locked, settop-locked 
 perversion of anti-technology. Ugh.)


I have a set of these headphones that I got in winter 2011. The 
battery lasts for around 8 hours on a charge and is charged via a 
regular mini-USB cable. The construction is very sturdy. The only 
wear on the headset is that some of the covering on the 
headphones is coming off. If you're not an audiophile, it's 
perfectly serviceable in that regard, and being wireless is a 
huge plus. I have a hard time going back to wired headphones now.

Before this headset I had a ~130$ Turtle Beach headset and it 
broke within a year and a half. One of the ear "cups" broke off 
entirely because the only thing keeping it attached to the 
headband is a thin plastic cylinder. Worse, Turtle Beach only 
guarantees their headsets 1 year. I tried sending Turtle Beach's 
customer service an email to get them to make an exception, but 
no dice. I have 3 other friends that had their Turtle Beach 
headsets break within a year, one who had it shipped to him and 
it came broken. And now I realize that I'm ranting.

TL;DR: Sony's wireless PS3 headset is great, Turtle Beach 
absolutely sucks.
Jun 09 2014
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/9/2014 2:48 PM, Meta wrote:

 On Monday, 9 June 2014 at 18:03:54 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Speaking of such things, I've actually been considering that pair Sony
 recently put out aimed at the PS3/PS4. While I generally dislike

 Any experience with those ones?


 I have a set of these headphones that I got in winter 2011.


Really? I had thought they'd only come out a few months ago? Now I'm 
just confused!
Jun 09 2014
parent "Meta" <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 9 June 2014 at 18:55:47 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 6/9/2014 2:48 PM, Meta wrote:

 On Monday, 9 June 2014 at 18:03:54 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Speaking of such things, I've actually been considering that 
 pair Sony
 recently put out aimed at the PS3/PS4. While I generally 
 dislike

 Any experience with those ones?


 I have a set of these headphones that I got in winter 2011.


 Really? I had thought they'd only come out a few months ago? 
 Now I'm just confused!


Are you talking about these?
http://www.walmart.ca/en/ip/playstation4-gold-wireless-stereo-headset/6000175585059

These are basically just an upgraded model. Sony's wireless
Playstation headset line have been around for awhile.
Jun 09 2014
prev sibling parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 6/9/14, 9:37 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 6/8/2014 9:51 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 On 6/8/14, 10:46 AM, SomeDude wrote:

 You want in ear isolating earphones. Basically earplugs that play music.
 Since the ambiant noise is greatly reduced, you don't need to play loud
 at all. Some brands isolate more or less well. Etymotics isolate very
 well.




 I'll never understand how people can use earbuds. They're so
 uncomfortable, walking around with stuff *inside* your ears. Awkward.

 I like the clip-style, they don't fall off, they let me still hear
 what's going on around me, and they don't feel like ear tampons.

 Only problem is it's impossible to find good clip-ons. *All* the Sony
 clip-ons have horrible sound quality and they're ugly to boot. The Koss
 ones are the *only* ones I've ever found that actually sound decent, but
 they invariably stop working within a few months, and warranty
 replacements take several weeks and cost $6-$9 each time.


I noticed that headphones are highly sensitive to personal preferences. 
Essentially it's worth shelling big bucks on some really fitting ones 
because the ill-fitting ones have negative value no matter how cheap. I 
shelled $350 on some TV wireless headphones (a pain to buy, too, they 
are Japanese and not to be found on regular US markets) because quite 
literally there was either that price or no TV headphones for me.


 Yah. One well-known fact about Facebook is it has an open layout


 Ouch, and here I'd been starting to think facebook was a good programmer
 workplace ;(

 I've programmed in everything from open "warroom" to coffee shop to
 cubicle farm to private office, and I'm confident in stating there is
 *NO* environment more poorly suited to programming than open
 environments. I don't understand how anyone can *ever* get any code
 written or problems solved in such an environment, sound-blocking
 headphones or not. I'd take a cubicle-hell before doing the "open
 environment" thing again. Sounds like they're valuing architectural
 trendiness over practical, appropriate decision-making.


 One less-known fact is it makes high quality
 headphones (both in-ear (Klipsch) and over-the-ear (Sennheiser))
 available to all employees for free. -- Andrei


 Well, even high quality headphones are cheaper than proper offices.
 Offering them free seems like the least they could do.


This has been often discussed in various circles. My take on it is that 
in abstract I'd agree that open layout has killer disadvantages, but for 
some reason that's hard to put the finger on it really works for 
Facebook, whose engineers undeniably have huge sustained productivity. 
To deny that fact would be making the classical mistake of sticking with 
a nice theory instead of adjusting it to reality. So I could say 
Facebook did exercise "appropriate decision-making" if "appropriate" is 
defined as "what we tried and found works great".

It may be the way Facebook structures projects - small teams that 
communicate closely. The low barrier for asking questions really keeps 
anyone from staying blocked for a long time.


Andrei
Jun 09 2014
prev sibling parent reply "Kagamin" <spam here.lot> writes:
On Tuesday, 3 June 2014 at 06:55:15 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 I prefer using a real computer as well but I like having a 
 smart phone to have something to do when I go to and from work 
 on the subway.


After staring at the monitor for 8 hours, I prefer to keep my 
eyes closed on my way home, and it seems I always have thoughts 
pending processing, which doesn't require internets.
Jun 04 2014
parent reply Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2014-06-04 09:42, Kagamin wrote:


 After staring at the monitor for 8 hours, I prefer to keep my eyes
 closed on my way home, and it seems I always have thoughts pending
 processing, which doesn't require internets.


To me it feels like the time goes a lot faster when I have something to 
do on the way home.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Jun 04 2014
parent "Dicebot" <public dicebot.lv> writes:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 19:00:15 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:

 On 2014-06-04 09:42, Kagamin wrote:


 After staring at the monitor for 8 hours, I prefer to keep my 
 eyes
 closed on my way home, and it seems I always have thoughts 
 pending
 processing, which doesn't require internets.


 To me it feels like the time goes a lot faster when I have 
 something to do on the way home.


It is mostly matter of time management. No way I could follow all 
NG posts and PR activity if my road to work and back wasn't 
devoted exclusively to that.
Jun 04 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 5/30/2014 4:35 AM, Chris wrote:

 Reading through Adam's book at home made me think about how much time I've
spent
 reading / learning / thinking about programs outside the office. I read TDPL in
 my spare time. I checked out things in the D Cookbook in my spare time and
 applied them the next day, like loads of other things about programming and
 actual programs. I guess most people here have similar experiences. The issue
is
 that most employers don't really appreciate this. Are we mad or just
passionate?


That's what separates real programmers from programmers who are just in it for 
the money.

There are lots of employers out there - if your employer doesn't appreciate
your 
skills, commitment, and passion, find another one!
Jun 01 2014
prev sibling parent reply "Dejan Lekic" <dejan.lekic gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 30 May 2014 at 11:35:19 UTC, Chris wrote:

 Reading through Adam's book at home made me think about how 
 much time I've spent reading / learning / thinking about 
 programs outside the office. I read TDPL in my spare time. I 
 checked out things in the D Cookbook in my spare time and 
 applied them the next day, like loads of other things about 
 programming and actual programs. I guess most people here have 
 similar experiences. The issue is that most employers don't 
 really appreciate this. Are we mad or just passionate?


I humbly believe programmer who does not spend spare time reading 
literature related to his/her work is most likely going to lose 
the job at some point, as people who DO spend time in their 
self-education will take the place.

Surely, there is an exception - when company actually INVESTS in 
the education of employees. Unfortunately not all companies do 
this. Most big ones do, smaller companies most likely won't have 
resources for education of employees.

Furthermore, they think the work itself will educate. Sure it 
will, to a certain level. But work won't teach us new 
technologies and techniques. - This is something we learn 
ourselves. Here is reason why it is always good to have a geek 
who spends another 8h a day at home learning new, exciting stuff 
- because that geek typically shares that knowlege at work as 
well.
Jun 04 2014
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/4/2014 7:59 AM, Dejan Lekic wrote:

 I humbly believe programmer who does not spend spare time reading
 literature related to his/her work is most likely going to lose the job
 at some point, as people who DO spend time in their self-education will
 take the place.


I know from direct observational experience that, depending on the 
company, keeping one's job (or even getting one in the first place) is 
not always dependent on one's ability to actually do the job at all.

(Heck, I've tutored CS 101 students, and even still: the worst code I've 
ever seen by far was NOT beginners, but was production code written by 
professionals whose jobs were nowhere near the chopping block.)

That said, you're certainly right that continual self-education is very 
important (even if one's job isn't on the line).
Jun 04 2014
next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 01:57:13PM -0400, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d
wrote:

 On 6/4/2014 7:59 AM, Dejan Lekic wrote:

I humbly believe programmer who does not spend spare time reading
literature related to his/her work is most likely going to lose the
job at some point, as people who DO spend time in their
self-education will take the place.


 
 I know from direct observational experience that, depending on the
 company, keeping one's job (or even getting one in the first place) is
 not always dependent on one's ability to actually do the job at all.
 
 (Heck, I've tutored CS 101 students, and even still: the worst code
 I've ever seen by far was NOT beginners, but was production code
 written by professionals whose jobs were nowhere near the chopping
 block.)


Actually, seasoned coders are often some of the worst offenders when it
comes to writing bad code. The accumulation of uncorrected bad habits
over time, plus the arrogance that comes from seniority, sometimes make
this problem uncorrectable. They will continue writing bad code out of
pure habit, and have enough seniority to insist that it's the right way
to do things, even if it's blatantly wrong.

Newbie coders, OTOH, are still malleable and any bad habits or poor
coding practices still stand a chance of being corrected, given the
proper coaching. Plus, they don't have seniority and so will actually
listen when you correct them.

Of course, seasoned coders do have hard-earned experience that newbies
don't have, and this can make them very valuable in spite of their
flaws.



 That said, you're certainly right that continual self-education is
 very important (even if one's job isn't on the line).


If *I* were ever in a position to hire, I'd say that reluctance to
continue learning is a sign that I probably don't want to hire that
person.


T

-- 
Tech-savvy: euphemism for nerdy.
Jun 04 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 13:57:13 -0400
Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:


 I know from direct observational experience that, depending on the
 company, keeping one's job (or even getting one in the first place)
 is not always dependent on one's ability to actually do the job at
 all.


When I started having to do interviews at work, I was shocked at how bad most
of the candidates were - many of whom have had jobs as programmers for years.
And there a number of folks who are already employed where I work who are bad
enough that I don't know how they ever got the job or how they've kept it
beyond a reluctance to fire people on the part of management (especially when
the poor coder is a really nice person).

- Jonathan M Davis
Jun 05 2014
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 6/5/2014 1:46 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 I don't know how they ever got the job or how they've kept it
 beyond a reluctance to fire people on the part of management (especially when
 the poor coder is a really nice person).


I'd always thought that managers got a "quickening" whenever they fired someone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AoOa-Fz2kw
Jun 05 2014
parent Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/5/2014 4:56 AM, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 6/5/2014 1:46 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 I don't know how they ever got the job or how they've kept it
 beyond a reluctance to fire people on the part of management
 (especially when
 the poor coder is a really nice person).


 I'd always thought that managers got a "quickening" whenever they fired
 someone.

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AoOa-Fz2kw


Man do I wish movie effects still looked that good. Everything looks 
like a CG cartoon now. Like that new Tom Cruise movie they're 
advertizing - that just *looks* terrible, just visually awful. And it's 
gotten so atrociously common.
Jun 05 2014
prev sibling parent reply "Dejan Lekic" <dejan.lekic gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:57:16 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 6/4/2014 7:59 AM, Dejan Lekic wrote:

 I humbly believe programmer who does not spend spare time 
 reading
 literature related to his/her work is most likely going to 
 lose the job
 at some point, as people who DO spend time in their 
 self-education will
 take the place.


 I know from direct observational experience that, depending on 
 the company, keeping one's job (or even getting one in the 
 first place) is not always dependent on one's ability to 
 actually do the job at all.

 (Heck, I've tutored CS 101 students, and even still: the worst 
 code I've ever seen by far was NOT beginners, but was 
 production code written by professionals whose jobs were 
 nowhere near the chopping block.)


Well, we both know that circumstances can be pretty chaotic in 
any company. I am not going to defend professionals who write bad 
code, but I am just saying that I can understand the stress, and 
all that goes together, especially if the person is senior.

A typical scenario is when (top-level) manager (M) want thing 
yesterday, and tell senior engineer (SE)

M: How long will it take?
SE: Well, we did not even analyse the requirements for this 
feature. Let's spend some time brainstorming this first, and then 
I will be able to do better estimation.
M: We have no time for that, and I think you already have all you 
need.
SE: OK, 3 days.
M: What??? We need this thing yesterday!
SE: Well, I could do a quick hack... It will take 1 day, but we 
will not have time to test, no time for code quality, etc.
M: DO IT!!!
(that "quick hack" code stays there because next week another 
urgent thing came, and SE never had time to make the code better)

Moral of the story: it is not SE whom we have to blame for bad 
code, it can easily be the management who made deliberate 
decision for that...


 That said, you're certainly right that continual self-education 
 is very important (even if one's job isn't on the line).
Jun 06 2014
next sibling parent "Chris" <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 13:24:22 UTC, Dejan Lekic wrote:

 On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:57:16 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
 wrote:

 On 6/4/2014 7:59 AM, Dejan Lekic wrote:

 I humbly believe programmer who does not spend spare time 
 reading
 literature related to his/her work is most likely going to 
 lose the job
 at some point, as people who DO spend time in their 
 self-education will
 take the place.


 I know from direct observational experience that, depending on 
 the company, keeping one's job (or even getting one in the 
 first place) is not always dependent on one's ability to 
 actually do the job at all.

 (Heck, I've tutored CS 101 students, and even still: the worst 
 code I've ever seen by far was NOT beginners, but was 
 production code written by professionals whose jobs were 
 nowhere near the chopping block.)


 Well, we both know that circumstances can be pretty chaotic in 
 any company. I am not going to defend professionals who write 
 bad code, but I am just saying that I can understand the 
 stress, and all that goes together, especially if the person is 
 senior.

 A typical scenario is when (top-level) manager (M) want thing 
 yesterday, and tell senior engineer (SE)

 M: How long will it take?
 SE: Well, we did not even analyse the requirements for this 
 feature. Let's spend some time brainstorming this first, and 
 then I will be able to do better estimation.
 M: We have no time for that, and I think you already have all 
 you need.
 SE: OK, 3 days.
 M: What??? We need this thing yesterday!
 SE: Well, I could do a quick hack... It will take 1 day, but we 
 will not have time to test, no time for code quality, etc.
 M: DO IT!!!
 (that "quick hack" code stays there because next week another 
 urgent thing came, and SE never had time to make the code 
 better)

 Moral of the story: it is not SE whom we have to blame for bad 
 code, it can easily be the management who made deliberate 
 decision for that...


If people knew how laws, sausages and software are made, there'd 
be a revolution. :)

I remember that the ATMs of a particular bank didn't work for 
several days, because they used an untested patch that contained 
an infinite loop.


 That said, you're certainly right that continual 
 self-education is very important (even if one's job isn't on 
 the line).
Jun 06 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 01:24:20PM +0000, Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]

 A typical scenario is when (top-level) manager (M) want thing
 yesterday, and tell senior engineer (SE)
 
 M: How long will it take?
 SE: Well, we did not even analyse the requirements for this feature.
 Let's spend some time brainstorming this first, and then I will be
 able to do better estimation.
 M: We have no time for that, and I think you already have all you
 need.
 SE: OK, 3 days.
 M: What??? We need this thing yesterday!
 SE: Well, I could do a quick hack... It will take 1 day, but we will
 not have time to test, no time for code quality, etc.
 M: DO IT!!!
 (that "quick hack" code stays there because next week another urgent
 thing came, and SE never had time to make the code better)
 
 Moral of the story: it is not SE whom we have to blame for bad code,
 it can easily be the management who made deliberate decision for
 that...


[...]

Yeah that sounds very familiar. A typical situation at my job goes
something like this:

Customer: I want feature X!
Sales rep: OK, we'll implement X in 1 month.
Customer: No, I want it by last month!
Sales rep: OK, and we'll throw in feature Y too, at no extra charge.
(Later)
Sales rep (to coders): Here's a new project for you: implement X and Y.
Coders: That sounds really complicated! It will take us 2 months.
Sales rep: What?! We don't have 2 months! They want this by *last* month!
Coders: That's impossible. Even the quickest hack we can do will take 1
	month.
Sales rep: This is a huge customer and it's going to cost us a billion
	dollar deal! You have to *make* it work!
Coders: sigh... OK, 3 weeks.
Sales rep: No, yesterday.
Coders: Fine, tomorrow we'll make a paper-n-glue model.
Sales rep: Today.
Coders: Sigh...


T

-- 
Gone Chopin. Bach in a minuet.
Jun 06 2014
next sibling parent reply Timon Gehr <timon.gehr gmx.ch> writes:
On 06/06/2014 04:37 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Yeah that sounds very familiar. A typical situation at my job goes
 something like this:

 Customer: I want feature X!
 Sales rep: OK, we'll implement X in 1 month.
 Customer: No, I want it by last month!
 Sales rep: OK, and we'll throw in feature Y too, at no extra charge.
 (Later)
 Sales rep (to coders): Here's a new project for you: implement X and Y.
 Coders: That sounds really complicated! It will take us 2 months.
 Sales rep: What?! We don't have 2 months! They want this by*last*  month!
 Coders: That's impossible. Even the quickest hack we can do will take 1
 	month.
 Sales rep: This is a huge customer and it's going to cost us a billion
 	dollar deal! You have to*make*  it work!
 Coders: sigh... OK, 3 weeks.
 Sales rep: No, yesterday.
 Coders: Fine, tomorrow we'll make a paper-n-glue model.
 Sales rep: Today.
 Coders: Sigh...


Isn't the fundamental problem here that the customer will pay a billion 
dollars even if the software ends up being full of bugs?
Jun 06 2014
parent reply "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 05:14:34PM +0200, Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On 06/06/2014 04:37 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:

Yeah that sounds very familiar. A typical situation at my job goes
something like this:

Customer: I want feature X!
Sales rep: OK, we'll implement X in 1 month.
Customer: No, I want it by last month!
Sales rep: OK, and we'll throw in feature Y too, at no extra charge.
(Later)
Sales rep (to coders): Here's a new project for you: implement X and Y.
Coders: That sounds really complicated! It will take us 2 months.
Sales rep: What?! We don't have 2 months! They want this by*last*  month!
Coders: That's impossible. Even the quickest hack we can do will take 1
	month.
Sales rep: This is a huge customer and it's going to cost us a billion
	dollar deal! You have to*make*  it work!
Coders: sigh... OK, 3 weeks.
Sales rep: No, yesterday.
Coders: Fine, tomorrow we'll make a paper-n-glue model.
Sales rep: Today.
Coders: Sigh...


 
 Isn't the fundamental problem here that the customer will pay a billion
 dollars even if the software ends up being full of bugs?


Yes, because the customer is a corporate entity, whose upper management
doesn't know (nor care) about the difference between good software and
working but very buggy software. They dictate the financial decisions,
and their IT department just has to live with it. So it really goes both
ways. Company A's upper management decides to acquire software X from
company B, and company B's upper management decides on an unrealistic
schedule, and both A's and B's tech staff have to suffer the
consequences. A's tech staff can't produce good software in that
unrealistic timeframe, and B's tech staff have to deal with all the bugs
that end up in X.


--T
Jun 06 2014
parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 6/6/2014 1:06 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 05:14:34PM +0200, Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Isn't the fundamental problem here that the customer will pay a billion
 dollars even if the software ends up being full of bugs?


 Yes, because the customer is a corporate entity, whose upper management
 doesn't know (nor care) about the difference between good software and
 working but very buggy software. They dictate the financial decisions,
 and their IT department just has to live with it. So it really goes both
 ways. Company A's upper management decides to acquire software X from
 company B, and company B's upper management decides on an unrealistic
 schedule, and both A's and B's tech staff have to suffer the
 consequences. A's tech staff can't produce good software in that
 unrealistic timeframe, and B's tech staff have to deal with all the bugs
 that end up in X.


Bottom line is, managers are purely liabilities, not assets.

It's no surprise to me that the best software out there is usually OSS, 
where there isn't one damn manager anywhere to be found. Funny how 
people think managers perform an actual function, and yet we get by fine 
- BETTER - without their existence.
Jun 06 2014
next sibling parent reply David Gileadi <gileadis NSPMgmail.com> writes:
On 6/6/14, 11:01 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Bottom line is, managers are purely liabilities, not assets.

 It's no surprise to me that the best software out there is usually OSS,
 where there isn't one damn manager anywhere to be found. Funny how
 people think managers perform an actual function, and yet we get by fine
 - BETTER - without their existence.


In my experience a good manager protects you from outrageous demands 
from the customer. Just the kinds of examples that were mentioned 
earlier in this thread, in fact.

I'm lucky to have had a couple of managers that actually do this, and 
I'm super grateful for them.
Jun 06 2014
parent "SomeDude" <lolilol mailmetrash.com> writes:
On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 18:40:28 UTC, David Gileadi wrote:

 In my experience a good manager protects you from outrageous 
 demands from the customer. Just the kinds of examples that were 
 mentioned earlier in this thread, in fact.

 I'm lucky to have had a couple of managers that actually do 
 this, and I'm super grateful for them.


In my experience, the best software managers were good coders who 
moved to management positions, or managers who don't hesitate to 
sit next to coders to really try to understand what the issues 
are.
Jun 08 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 02:01:38PM -0400, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d
wrote:

 On 6/6/2014 1:06 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:

On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 05:14:34PM +0200, Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d wrote:

Isn't the fundamental problem here that the customer will pay a
billion dollars even if the software ends up being full of bugs?


Yes, because the customer is a corporate entity, whose upper
management doesn't know (nor care) about the difference between good
software and working but very buggy software. They dictate the
financial decisions, and their IT department just has to live with
it. So it really goes both ways. Company A's upper management decides
to acquire software X from company B, and company B's upper
management decides on an unrealistic schedule, and both A's and B's
tech staff have to suffer the consequences. A's tech staff can't
produce good software in that unrealistic timeframe, and B's tech
staff have to deal with all the bugs that end up in X.


 
 Bottom line is, managers are purely liabilities, not assets.
 
 It's no surprise to me that the best software out there is usually
 OSS, where there isn't one damn manager anywhere to be found. Funny
 how people think managers perform an actual function, and yet we get
 by fine - BETTER - without their existence.


To be fair, there *are* some good managers out there who will actually
bother to understand the limits of technology and turn down unreasonable
customer requests. Get rid of them, and you may end up with the opposite
problem:

Techie A: Hey dude, this morning I got this crazy kewl idea on how to
	make our spreadsheet app play a flight simulator!
Techie B: Really?! Let's see it!
Techie A: Here, you put this formula in this cell here, and it exploits
	the automatic solver system to generate flight coordinates! And
	it uses the built-in graphing function to do 3D rendering!
Techie B: But it doesn't let me shoot missiles at buildings.
Techie A: True. But if we replace this function here with this other
	equivalent that does almost the same thing, but does this other
	thing when called with these unreasonable parameters, then we
	can simulate exploding buildings!
(2 months later...)
Techie A: Dude, how come our product isn't selling, while Dumbass
	Corporation's clearly-inferior product is so popular??!
Techie B: I dunno, maybe we need to market our product?
Techie A: But I already talked to 50 customers, but all the deals fell
	through 'cos they keep insisting on unreasonable deadlines!
Techie B: Yeah, why are customers so dumb?! They don't deserve our
	product! Oh BTW, did you pay the rent yet?
Techie A: What rent?! I thought you paid for it! I'm broke, man!
Techie B: So am I! Looks like we're gonna hafta close shop...
Techie A: But what about the flight simulator...?!

;-)

I do agree, though, that *in general*, it seems OSS churns out far
superior products than proprietary companies. The most provoking
sticking point is interoperability, which basically gets thrown out of
the window on day 1 because business types have this irrational fear
that allowing interoperability will allow competitors to beat them. So
either the software is crippled and can't work with anybody else
(fortunately, the internet has made this approach untenable), or the
data format is kept under NDAs and threats of lawsuits should anybody
have the audacity to try to interoperate with it, a veritable walled
garden where only corporations with deep pockets can afford to pay for
access to API docs.  Whatever the scenario may be, the invariable
outcome is that end consumers suffer. They have to put up with software
A's output files refusing to work with software B, or when edited under
software C all the formatting gets screwed up, etc..

And this is just on the point of interoperability... there's also
transparency, which is completely absent in most (all?) proprietary
houses that I know of. Marketing types seem to have this irrational fear
that publishing a list of known bugs will give a negative image of the
company, and so no bug databases are ever open to the public. When you
submit a bug report, even *you* can't look at its progress afterwards.
And who knows how many security holes are lurking there that nobody
knows about (except the kind of people that you *don't* want to know
about these things -- you *know* they're gonna find it one day; security
via obscurity doesn't work)?

Sure OSS may lack the glitz and eye-candy, but I'd rather have software
that functions *well*, than software that has all the glitz but it's
full of bugs and poor performance underneath.


T

-- 
English is useful because it is a mess. Since English is a mess, it maps
well onto the problem space, which is also a mess, which we call
reality. Similarly, Perl was designed to be a mess, though in the
nicests of all possible ways. -- Larry Wall
Jun 06 2014
next sibling parent reply "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 19:37:47 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Techie A: Hey dude, this morning I got this crazy kewl idea on 
 how to
 	make our spreadsheet app play a flight simulator!
 Techie B: Really?! Let's see it!
 Techie A: Here, you put this formula in this cell here, and it 
 exploits
 	the automatic solver system to generate flight coordinates! And
 	it uses the built-in graphing function to do 3D rendering!
 Techie B: But it doesn't let me shoot missiles at buildings.
 Techie A: True. But if we replace this function here with this 
 other
 	equivalent that does almost the same thing, but does this other
 	thing when called with these unreasonable parameters, then we
 	can simulate exploding buildings!
 (2 months later...)
 Techie A: Dude, how come our product isn't selling, while 
 Dumbass
 	Corporation's clearly-inferior product is so popular??!
 Techie B: I dunno, maybe we need to market our product?
 Techie A: But I already talked to 50 customers, but all the 
 deals fell
 	through 'cos they keep insisting on unreasonable deadlines!
 Techie B: Yeah, why are customers so dumb?! They don't deserve 
 our
 	product! Oh BTW, did you pay the rent yet?
 Techie A: What rent?! I thought you paid for it! I'm broke, man!
 Techie B: So am I! Looks like we're gonna hafta close shop...
 Techie A: But what about the flight simulator...?!

 ;-)


Techie A: Man we really fucked by choosing ruby on rails. Our
codebase has become unmaintainable. We must do something.
Technie B: Let's migrate to Node.js
Jun 06 2014
next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 07:49:47PM +0000, deadalnix via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 19:37:47 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
 Digitalmars-d wrote:

Techie A: Hey dude, this morning I got this crazy kewl idea on how to
	make our spreadsheet app play a flight simulator!
Techie B: Really?! Let's see it!
Techie A: Here, you put this formula in this cell here, and it exploits
	the automatic solver system to generate flight coordinates! And
	it uses the built-in graphing function to do 3D rendering!
Techie B: But it doesn't let me shoot missiles at buildings.
Techie A: True. But if we replace this function here with this other
	equivalent that does almost the same thing, but does this other
	thing when called with these unreasonable parameters, then we
	can simulate exploding buildings!
(2 months later...)
Techie A: Dude, how come our product isn't selling, while Dumbass
	Corporation's clearly-inferior product is so popular??!
Techie B: I dunno, maybe we need to market our product?
Techie A: But I already talked to 50 customers, but all the deals fell
	through 'cos they keep insisting on unreasonable deadlines!
Techie B: Yeah, why are customers so dumb?! They don't deserve our
	product! Oh BTW, did you pay the rent yet?
Techie A: What rent?! I thought you paid for it! I'm broke, man!
Techie B: So am I! Looks like we're gonna hafta close shop...
Techie A: But what about the flight simulator...?!

;-)


 
 Techie A: Man we really fucked by choosing ruby on rails. Our
 codebase has become unmaintainable. We must do something.
 Technie B: Let's migrate to Node.js


(2 months later)
Techie A: The Node.js implementation is now running but we still have no
	customers.
Techie B: I know, let's invent our own system from scratch! Then we'll
	know for sure it's better!

(2 years later)
Techie A: We've reinvented our system 5 times over, and we still have no
	customers, and now we're in debt and the bank is after us.
Techie B: I'm gonna get a job at McDonald's...


T

-- 
A linguistics professor was lecturing to his class one day. "In
English," he said, "A double negative forms a positive. In some
languages, though, such as Russian, a double negative is still a
negative. However, there is no language wherein a double positive can
form a negative." A voice from the back of the room piped up, "Yeah,
yeah."
Jun 06 2014
parent Ary Borenszweig <ary esperanto.org.ar> writes:
On 6/6/14, 5:03 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 07:49:47PM +0000, deadalnix via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 19:37:47 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
 Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Techie A: Hey dude, this morning I got this crazy kewl idea on how to
 	make our spreadsheet app play a flight simulator!
 Techie B: Really?! Let's see it!
 Techie A: Here, you put this formula in this cell here, and it exploits
 	the automatic solver system to generate flight coordinates! And
 	it uses the built-in graphing function to do 3D rendering!
 Techie B: But it doesn't let me shoot missiles at buildings.
 Techie A: True. But if we replace this function here with this other
 	equivalent that does almost the same thing, but does this other
 	thing when called with these unreasonable parameters, then we
 	can simulate exploding buildings!
 (2 months later...)
 Techie A: Dude, how come our product isn't selling, while Dumbass
 	Corporation's clearly-inferior product is so popular??!
 Techie B: I dunno, maybe we need to market our product?
 Techie A: But I already talked to 50 customers, but all the deals fell
 	through 'cos they keep insisting on unreasonable deadlines!
 Techie B: Yeah, why are customers so dumb?! They don't deserve our
 	product! Oh BTW, did you pay the rent yet?
 Techie A: What rent?! I thought you paid for it! I'm broke, man!
 Techie B: So am I! Looks like we're gonna hafta close shop...
 Techie A: But what about the flight simulator...?!

 ;-)


 Techie A: Man we really fucked by choosing ruby on rails. Our
 codebase has become unmaintainable. We must do something.
 Technie B: Let's migrate to Node.js


 (2 months later)
 Techie A: The Node.js implementation is now running but we still have no
 	customers.


Don't worry, they'll call back.
Jun 06 2014
prev sibling parent "SomeDude" <lolilol mailmetrash.com> writes:
On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 19:49:48 UTC, deadalnix wrote:


 Techie A: Man we really fucked by choosing ruby on rails. Our
 codebase has become unmaintainable. We must do something.
 Technie B: Let's migrate to Node.js


... and use mongodb as our new shiny database. 'cuz it's so kewl 
and webscale.


6 months pass...

Technie B (now looking for a new job): let's write a blog post on 
how mongodb fucked our project



 Jun 08 2014



prev sibling  parent  "Kagamin" <spam here.lot>  writes:


On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 19:37:47 UTC, H. S. Teoh via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:

 To be fair, there *are* some good managers out there who will 
 actually
 bother to understand the limits of technology and turn down 
 unreasonable
 customer requests.


No customer would tolerate turning down their requests. I think, 
they turn the request to constructive route.



 Jun 07 2014



prev sibling next sibling parent  "Paolo Invernizzi" <paolo.invernizzi no.address>  writes:


On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 18:01:44 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 On 6/6/2014 1:06 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Bottom line is, managers are purely liabilities, not assets.

 It's no surprise to me that the best software out there is 
 usually OSS, where there isn't one damn manager anywhere to be 
 found. Funny how people think managers perform an actual 
 function, and yet we get by fine - BETTER - without their 
 existence.


Well, * cough cough*, there are exceptions...
---
Paolo



 Jun 06 2014



prev sibling  parent  Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com>  writes:


On 6/6/2014 11:01 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:

 Bottom line is, managers are purely liabilities, not assets.


I keep having my manager sacked, but when I look in the mirror he's still there.



 Jun 06 2014



prev sibling  parent  "Paolo Invernizzi" <paolo.invernizzi no.address>  writes:


On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 14:39:03 UTC, H. S. Teoh via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:

 On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 01:24:20PM +0000, Dejan Lekic via 
 Digitalmars-d wrote:
 [...]

 A typical scenario is when (top-level) manager (M) want thing
 yesterday, and tell senior engineer (SE)
 
 M: How long will it take?
 SE: Well, we did not even analyse the requirements for this 
 feature.
 Let's spend some time brainstorming this first, and then I 
 will be
 able to do better estimation.
 M: We have no time for that, and I think you already have all 
 you
 need.
 SE: OK, 3 days.
 M: What??? We need this thing yesterday!
 SE: Well, I could do a quick hack... It will take 1 day, but 
 we will
 not have time to test, no time for code quality, etc.
 M: DO IT!!!
 (that "quick hack" code stays there because next week another 
 urgent
 thing came, and SE never had time to make the code better)
 
 Moral of the story: it is not SE whom we have to blame for bad 
 code,
 it can easily be the management who made deliberate decision 
 for
 that...


 [...]

 Yeah that sounds very familiar. A typical situation at my job 
 goes
 something like this:

 Customer: I want feature X!
 Sales rep: OK, we'll implement X in 1 month.
 Customer: No, I want it by last month!
 Sales rep: OK, and we'll throw in feature Y too, at no extra 
 charge.
 (Later)
 Sales rep (to coders): Here's a new project for you: implement 
 X and Y.
 Coders: That sounds really complicated! It will take us 2 
 months.
 Sales rep: What?! We don't have 2 months! They want this by 
 *last* month!
 Coders: That's impossible. Even the quickest hack we can do 
 will take 1
 	month.
 Sales rep: This is a huge customer and it's going to cost us a 
 billion
 	dollar deal! You have to *make* it work!
 Coders: sigh... OK, 3 weeks.
 Sales rep: No, yesterday.
 Coders: Fine, tomorrow we'll make a paper-n-glue model.
 Sales rep: Today.
 Coders: Sigh...


 T


That's why I love being a manager AND a coder!

;-)

---
Paolo



 Jun 06 2014



prev sibling next sibling parent  Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com>  writes:


On 6/6/2014 9:24 AM, Dejan Lekic wrote:

 A typical scenario is when (top-level) manager (M) want thing yesterday,
 and tell senior engineer (SE)

 M: How long will it take?
 SE: Well, we did not even analyse the requirements for this feature.
 Let's spend some time brainstorming this first, and then I will be able
 to do better estimation.
 M: We have no time for that, and I think you already have all you need.
 SE: OK, 3 days.
 M: What??? We need this thing yesterday!
 SE: Well, I could do a quick hack... It will take 1 day, but we will not
 have time to test, no time for code quality, etc.
 M: DO IT!!!
 (that "quick hack" code stays there because next week another urgent
 thing came, and SE never had time to make the code better)


That's what's known as a *good* corporate culture.

Conversely, my experience is more like this (common occurrence):


[Manager barges in]
Random Developer: Yes? What is it?
Manager: The sales dept just sold feature X, promised it by deadline Y, 
so go do it.

[At *every* weekly developer meeting]
Manager (pretending to be useful, as usual): The amount of bugs and slow 
rate of fixing is unacceptable. This company is at a point where we need 
to transition away from the "fire-fighting mode" we've been in.
Everyone: About damn time. Sounds great.

[A few days later]
Random Developer: Uh huh?
Manager: The sales dept just sold feature Z, promised it by deadline Q, 
so quit fiddling with that unimportant stuff and go do it.


But then, our product was made specifically for HR personnel and 
headhunter agencies, and those people are the dumbest of the dumbest 
dumbshits, so they'd never be able to recognize diarrhea if they were 
drinking it, let alone know what software is worth buying. To this day 
I'm convinced that's the sole reason that "software" company has managed 
to exist at all despite their complete and total ineptitude.



 Jun 06 2014



prev sibling  parent reply "Mattcoder" <fromtheotherside mail.com>  writes:


Well, some managers are mindless and that story about do it now 
or we will lose our customer,  in most cases it's just a 
bluff/threat or call it what you want.

The customers usually don't change their software like they 
change bakery if the bread is horrible. There are many costs 
envolved in changing application etc.

I've saw some programmers complaining about their managers, but 
what I really would like to see are these programmers joining 
together to convince the manager the problems with fast and low 
quality software, and how their company will lose money fixing it 
later.

Matheus.



 Jun 06 2014



 next sibling parent  Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org>  writes:


Am 06.06.2014 20:51, schrieb Mattcoder:

 Well, some managers are mindless and that story about do it now or we
 will lose our customer,  in most cases it's just a bluff/threat or call
 it what you want.

 The customers usually don't change their software like they change
 bakery if the bread is horrible. There are many costs envolved in
 changing application etc.

 I've saw some programmers complaining about their managers, but what I
 really would like to see are these programmers joining together to
 convince the manager the problems with fast and low quality software,
 and how their company will lose money fixing it later.

 Matheus.


Except that at companies with large budgets, they do change, just because.

--
Paulo



 Jun 06 2014



prev sibling  parent reply "SomeDude" <lolilol mailmetrash.com>  writes:


On Friday, 6 June 2014 at 18:51:17 UTC, Mattcoder wrote:

 Well, some managers are mindless and that story about do it now 
 or we will lose our customer,  in most cases it's just a 
 bluff/threat or call it what you want.


Unfortunately, commercial's bonus is based on their selling
performance, so they will sell anything they can, even if it
doesn't exist yet. Especially if they need to win a contract in
face of competitors.
OTOH, if the contract is won, the company has an obligation to
deliver.


 I've saw some programmers complaining about their managers, but 
 what I really would like to see are these programmers joining 
 together to convince the manager the problems with fast and low 
 quality software, and how their company will lose money fixing 
 it later.

 Matheus.


It's hard, because most managaers more or less know that, and
they prefer to get the money right away and deal with tech issues
later, hoping that they are overblown by the dev team and won't
jeopardize entirely the project.

   From an economic POV, it's the right thing to do. The benefit of
this is getting the contract in face of the competition; but if
the quality is too low, the risk is losing the customer at the
end and getting a bad reputation.

The company I work for has been somewhat guilty of this attitude,
selling an unfinished product for quite a large amount of money.
The problem is, the customer still hasn't paid us a year later,
because of many technical instabilities (not mentionning obvious
corruption problems on the customer side). Today, the product has
mostly stabilized, but we're still running after our money.



 Jun 08 2014



  parent  "Kagamin" <spam here.lot>  writes:


On Sunday, 8 June 2014 at 09:20:45 UTC, SomeDude wrote:

 Unfortunately, commercial's bonus is based on their selling
 performance, so they will sell anything they can, even if it
 doesn't exist yet. Especially if they need to win a contract in
 face of competitors.
 OTOH, if the contract is won, the company has an obligation to
 deliver.


That's where the real management begins. Sometimes it's possible 
to reschedule the agreements or allocate more resources on the 
project.


 I've saw some programmers complaining about their managers, 
 but what I really would like to see are these programmers 
 joining together to convince the manager the problems with 
 fast and low quality software, and how their company will lose 
 money fixing it later.

 Matheus.


 It's hard, because most managaers more or less know that, and
 they prefer to get the money right away and deal with tech 
 issues
 later, hoping that they are overblown by the dev team and won't
 jeopardize entirely the project.

   From an economic POV, it's the right thing to do. The benefit 
 of
 this is getting the contract in face of the competition; but if
 the quality is too low, the risk is losing the customer at the
 end and getting a bad reputation.


Our managers believe bugs are much more expensive than quality 
software development to the point we have the word that nobody 
cares how long you develop the feature, the only concern is 
whether it will work well. Nothing stops the customer from 
charging compensations from your company for disasters while you 
are fixing the bugs, it costs them nothing and they don't mind 
easy money. The result is the same: the customer has the quality 
software, but you've lost lots of money. So it's probably not the 
right economic strategy. It also means the customer had enough 
time on his hands until the software matured.



 Jun 08 2014