Hacker News Reader

> I mean, HN likes to be very dismissive of PHP but at the same Composer (the de-facto PHP package manager) avoids dependency conflicts entirely and provably because it contains a home-cooked SAT solver[1]. In PHP. Tackling an NP-complete problem without breaking a sweat. <

Any idea where can I find more details on that. The slideshow you linked does not provide enough information.

I wish I did! I can't remember how I learned that it's SAT based and google isn't very forthcoming :-(

Probably because most Google searches for "SAT" involve prep courses that help you achieve a score of 1600... [._.]

On the other hand, jargon searching wikipedia helps narrow results:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boolean_satisfiability_problem

i thought the SAT solver was a PHP port of libsolv.

Well, I'd like to kindly suggest that you think again about your assumptions, regarding why I was dismissive of Ruby. Ruby was still kinda/sorta new-school in 2013. Yet another technology stack as far as I could tell. Ruby was not quite a thing yet, back in 2008 or so. Probably because Rails was still pretty much somewhat "new."

Back in 2008, I still had yet to learn that Ruby was a compiled language, and that Rails was a runtime environment for web applications. In corporate enterprise 401k cubicle farms, there were only hushed mentions of Ruby among hobbyists as early as autumn, 2009 (the first time I remember hearing tell of such a thing). And mostly among those who developed on Macs, which was actually a little bit rare back then. Ubuntu was similarly revolutionary at that time, even if LAMP stacks were well established.

Rails hype was kicking into full gear around 2006/2007.

Well that's lovely.

"Wouldn't it be a much more interesting conclusion that there's fantastic people and not-so-fantastic people everywhere and it mostly just depends on where you look?"

Yes...except this wasn't thier conclusion...so...

This seems like a strange comment. Your parent suggests that your grandparent should have made a specific different interpretation, and you respond that the suggested interpretation is different?