tieTYT

Odd, I literally just saw one that did exactly that. It even forbade "outside activity" and I had to ask WTH that meant.

> I have a full time job and have a growing side business that I am going to be transitioning to my full time job in December.

Are you allowed to do that? Every full time job offer I've read forbids outside work.

This is on Google Compute Engine, not Google App Engine. It's not straight forward to me what GCE is a good fit for^1. Can someone explain in layman terms?

Based on the name, I'd think it be for long running concurrent algorithms that require many resources, but the M of MEAN is throwing me off. Why do you need a persistence layer? Is it to load the data for input? To store the data as output? Is it for anything you want? If the latter, why can't I use this exactly as I'd use GAE?

1: https://cloud.google.com/products/compute-engine/

Aw, I made the same mistake. Thanks for saying this. For others looking for more info about GCE: https://cloud.google.com/products/compute-engine/

No offense, but if your company's crunch time is so predictable, there must be a mistake in your scheduling. I've worked at companies where there is literally no crunch time, ever.

I use grunt.js and from my perspective gulp is nice syntactic sugar that solves the same problem. But, it's difficult for me to tell what webpack is for. Granted, I've only skimmed the documentation[1], but I feel like I haven't run into the problems that it's trying to solve. Is this meant for webapps that are hundreds of thousands of lines of code?

[1]: http://webpack.github.io/docs/what-is-webpack.html

It can take up to 5 minutes to restart my application.

Why does it matter if it's binary compatible? How does that affect the programmer? I guess I don't understand the difference/significance between binary and source compatibility?

I'm surprised to hear that it's not reflection compatible. As a Java programmer, I assumed that was the main point of C# properties: Create a property now because there's no logic needed, but if you need logic in the future you can change the code and nobody outside needs to be aware of the change.

I didn't understand this response. Are you saying the company doesn't release it because the developers are embarrassed of the quality of the code in the engine?

I ask this without having my own opinion on the matter: Won't those debates improve the design of the architecture? It's hard to imagine the time loss of debates being greater than the time loss of a rearchitecture.

> Some games like Dust have exploded in popularity through word of mouth. For the PC release, I'm sure Totalbiscuit sold thousands of units by himself.

That is marketing. Totalbiscuit probably couldn't have found it himself without the creator of Dust getting the word out to him (directly or indirectly).

I agree, it's probably easier and more beneficial on PC, but that doesn't really take away from my point.

I agree with most of this, except for this part:

> if your game is legit, you'll do just fine.

Even if your game is legit, nobody will buy it if they don't know it exists. IMO, marketing is just as important.

BTW, are you speaking from personal experience? Have you made a financially successful indie game?

Do you have any advice on how I can go about figuring this out? I have a feeling it's not a black and white thing. EG: That module I wrote may have made sales easier, but not impossible.

I've got an interesting problem with regards to this. For all I know, I work in the Profit Center, I'm just not informed of this. I'm never given an indication of how much money my code has earned the company.

It keeps using the word "employee". How does this apply to contractors and consultants? Do they negotiate their own terms? Are high earning ones expected to be exempt like employees?

> When a mutation came along that made the receptor not work, that animal was just as likely to survive as one that didn’t have the mutation.”

Then shouldn't there still be a chance of having the mutation because nothing is selecting for or against it? Instead it seems the entire species can't taste sweetness so the gene was removed. Why would that happen? I don't know of any other explanation than, "there is an advantage to not being able to taste sweetness".

EDIT: I removed "50/50" from my question. That wouldn't be the right percentage.

I wish this article focused on how to apply these techniques to actual problems a typical developer would have as opposed to, "Here are some ways of visualizing data".

It felt like my typical high school class. They'd teach us how to calculate the circumference of a circle, but they never told us what we'd use it for. "Programming" is not specific enough.

You're preaching to the choir. Your typical Java programmer doesn't even know what these phrases mean.

> Advocates of functional languages claim they produce an order of magnitude improvement in productivity. Experiments don't always verify that figure -- sometimes they show an improvement of only a factor of four.

It's weird, the first time I read this I was excited to read the source of this quote. When I finished reading I scrolled up to the top and was disappointed to see a citation missing. Does anyone know what experiment he's referring to?

That's a great idea. I'll do this next time.

The best part is I should be able to resolve any conflicts before I start bisecting.

Where's the "accept as the right answer" check mark? :)

Yeah, not a bad method. And I suppose if I've already commited my unit test, I could use a "git reset --soft" to put the test in a stash. Next time I use bisect, I'll try to do this. Thanks

You're not considering the time it takes to manually test.

  * How much time does it take to do a clean build?
  * How much time does it take to do a deploy?
  * How much time does it take to reproduce the issue manually?

Add those together and multiply them by the number of commits bisect makes you check. It can add up.

One thing that seems difficult with bisect are these series of steps:

  1. "Hey... this bug didn't use to happen.  Where'd that get introduced?"
  2. OK, this unit test will tell me when the bug is fixed.
  3. Now lets automate bisect to tell me where this 
     test first failed even though I just wrote it.

How do you do that? I think as long as you DON'T commit your unit test, bisect will carry over to every commit check. But, you'll have to make sure you commit all your other changes or else they'll be carried around, too: Conflict-city.

Also, if you do commit your unit test (a "bad" habit of mine) I have no idea how I'm supposed to work with this. I end up copying the unit test by hand to each commit it tries to test.

In summary, it seems like bisect was built with manual testing in mind. I know you can automate running a shell script, but I don't write my automated tests in shell script.

EDIT: Keep in mind, not all projects are interpreted. Some are compiled.

Yeah it's pretty good, but it still has issues. My game uses a manifest.cache and the console/networking tab does not give good feedback with it. In chrome, the console will tell me, "This file could not be found". In Firefox, it gives me no feedback that was a problem... things just don't work as expected.

Also, I'm pretty convinced the dev tools have some sort of memory leak in them. Every 3-5 days I have to restart Firefox or my game runs so slow it's unplayable. I don't think it has to do with my code because I've got no persistent store and refreshing the page doesn't fix it. Restarting the browser always does.

Sometimes the debugger gets confused and puts breakpoints on things I no longer have breakpoints on.

The profiler does not have a very useful view. I can't figure out how to delete reports I've made without closing the dev tools. More importantly, I can't find a convenient way to answer the question, "What are the slowest parts of this code?" I have to do a lot of manual labor expanding deeply nested trees.

As I said, it's pretty good. These are just things I'd like to see improved, not things that drive me crazy. I prefer the dev tools to firebug because firebug takes a relatively long time to start up.

Re: this update, I'm embarrassed to say I didn't know console.error even existed (I don't consider myself a JS expert). I've been using `throw new Error("message")`. Will that show stack traces now, too? I always have to put breakpoints on the line with the throw to figure out the call stack. This can add a lot of time to my debugging if I'm not sure how to reproduce the error.

Why doesn't the URL look how it would look if you hit y by default? Seems like that would be what you usually want.

When I send someone a link, it's because I want them to see what I'm looking at.

Wow I've gotta say, this looks great.

Something that bugs me is I couldn't copy the code in the upper right to the code "try it" section. I haven't used haskell for 6-12 months, so I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong.

Here's a screenshot: http://imgur.com/N2SdFVq

Regardless of how to fix this, I think something should be changed so this can't be someone's first impression.

> In Lua, it's impossible to have a dictionary that maps a key to nil: setting a key to nil removes it from the dictionary!

Wait is he really trying to say, "Setting a VALUE to nil removes the entry from the dictionary!"? If so, that sounds terrible.

I can imagine barking up the wrong tree wondering why my map is missing fields when the real problem is an object I passed into it is unexpectedly nil.

I want the "write once, run anywhere" that Java gives me. I guess I'm just spoiled, but it's what I've come to expect.

What made me give up on Haskell was all the libraries had native linux bindings. It was hell reusing code if you're developing on windows (and I've heard this is true on macs, too). Does OCaml have this issue?

Sorry, I meant "fringe" conspiracy theories. Otherwise my point was kind of off topic to bring up. Imagine if that "vaccines cause autism" crowd didn't get air time. Perhaps they wouldn't get personal exemptions.