166 karma · joined January 26, 2011
(Regardless of whether or not those are properly hyphenated.)
Edit: But this is still very cool.
Overly enthusiastic video demonstrating the issue for those who are curious. :)
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/codemash/abX4UEL4vG4/e...
(1,2) (3,4) (10,7) (11,1) (12, 2)Edit: I should note this article's advice is really good advice if your focus is performance.
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/base/4.6.0.1/doc...
http://hackage.haskell.org/packages/archive/stm/2.4.2/doc/ht...
Or UPS for that matter.
The author does explicitly point this out: "While I find this style strangely addictive, I don’t think I would advocate its general use."
No it doesn't. Especially if it's unintentional.
I bought a Nexus 7. It has touch-screen problems. They provided a way to contact them here (http://support.google.com/nexus/bin/request.py?contact_type=...).
I talked to the rep (after waiting about 30 minutes). They were helpful, direct, competent, and provided a way for me to contact the person I talked to via e-mail after the call was ended.
They organized a replacement device and even worked through the fact that I'd purchased the tablet from my brother-in-law.
If their future customer service offerings are the same as what I experienced last night, I have no concerns.
But should it be?
This is absolutely true. The costs to manage complexity now seem high when software is being built. The costs of managing that complexity in the future are far higher and may have to be paid in lives.
Not exactly relevant to this discussion, but good to keep in mind.
I work with C every day as an embedded developer. I've done a lot of safety critical work. By far the worst aspect of safety critical development is the complete inadequacy of many programmers who work on it.
The level of complexity that shows up in these system scares me. Even when introducing languages like Ada, people find a way to abuse them. Budgets get tight, schedules slip, and verification gets lax. These programmers are then the only people capable of dealing with the massively complex system they've built and the cycle repeats itself.
Ada's a great language, but it's not a panacea. I'm working on a language for embedded systems as well, but it's not going to ever fix the 'bad programmer' problem. The best I can hope to do is find ways to reduce the complexity of these systems through language features.
my hash table is useless if the users can't tickle the UI in such a way as to use the hash table.
They really have little to lose by pursuing this case which really frees up their legal team politically.