Here's a quick intro tutorial on design that I put together:
It was #1 on HN for a little while a year ago, and I still get positive comments on it. Hopefully it will be useful.
3,365 karma · joined March 28, 2007
It was #1 on HN for a little while a year ago, and I still get positive comments on it. Hopefully it will be useful.
"Obviously this is an utterly preposterous statement: it’s hard to think of a more ridiculous and esoteric coding requirement."
Or how about this:
"Don’t worry! I don’t think you should refactor all your code to be sure you have strings of length 23 or less. That would obviously be ridiculous. The speed increase sounds impressive, but actually the time differences I measured were insignificant until I allocated 100,000s or millions of strings – how many Ruby applications will need to create this many string values? And even if you do need to create many string objects, the pain and confusion caused by using only short strings would overwhelm any performance benefit you might get.
For me I really think understanding something about how the Ruby interpreter works is just fun! I enjoyed taking a look through a microscope at these sorts of tiny details. I do also suspect having some understanding of how Matz and his colleagues actually implemented the language will eventually help me to use Ruby in a wiser and more knowledgeable way. We’ll have to see… stay tuned for some more posts about Ruby internals!"
I truly do not understand the emotional reaction you were having when you wrote this comment. It sounds like you've had some issues in the past with your time being wasted debating pointless optimizations, and that's what you were reacting to.
The article is not advocating pointless optimizations. The article is simply exploring a cool little piece of MRI.
It sounds like you have a lot of experience with dealing with optimization, though. It'd be cool if you wrote something educational about optimization.
Some other title ideas:
* 23 characters ought to be enough for anybody
* 23: How Twitter could have solved their ruby scaling problem
The value of RSTRING_EMBED_LEN_MAX was chosen to match the size of the len/ptr/capa values. That’s where the 23 limit comes from.
Technically, I'd say "Land of Lisp" has been the most fun and the most rewarding.
A couple things: when you exit from a blank line, the blank line is saved because some people might prefer to keep a blank line. I can see that it's surprising, but hopefully it's easy to get used to.
When you unintentionally hit enter, does your entry get saved in addition to moving to a new, blank task? The reason why enter moves to a new task is that it allows you to quickly enter one item after another
I'll look into the tweet this / like this issue.
Thanks again!
* To delete a list, click on the trash button in the upper right.
* Right now you can hit left/right to jump between the tabs, but that's not ideal as the hotkeys don't work when a form field has focus
* I'll probably add labels or colors pretty soon. Personally, I don't use them but I know that a lot of people go crazy with that stuff. Just need to figure out how to do the UI
* Eventually there will be an API.
As for pricing, I'm not sure what I'm going to do yet. For now I'm considering just putting up a couple ads, though honestly I hate ads. The other option I'm considering is some kind of freemium model. If I go the freemium route, I'll probably give stripe a try.
. It's very keyboard-friendly
. It's easy to copy checklists. For example, if you had a publicly readable list of all the stuff you check on your car before going on a long trip, other people could easily copy that list to their own "list of lists"
. Sharing is easy. You can share with individuals or make public lists
Anywho, I'm really the only person who's used this so far, so I'd love to get some feedback
That aside - I believe the premise of Hank's post is that it's not a meritocracy in Silicon Valley. It's hard to know for sure whether this is true because there's no way to test this hypothesis. But I think it's safe to assume that VC's are still human, and like every other human, they all have biases, including racial biases. There's nothing wrong with that, in my opinion. However, if they're not aware of that bias - perhaps, mentally, they reject that they have any racial bias because they think that will make them a bad person - then they won't take any conscious steps to correct it. The result would be that fewer black entrepreneurs get funded.
You should realize that being black in America is not like being fat. For most of our country's history, black people have been treated as less than human. It wasn't even until fairly recently in our country's history that blacks gained the legal right, throughout the country, to use the same restrooms and water fountains. Can you imagine that? If you think that that kind of institutionalized racism has completely evaporated, you are wrong.
I think it would benefit you to read the book "Black Like Me" by John Howard Griffin. It will probably change your apparent opinion that black people are a bunch of whiners demanding charity.