Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | nilbot's comments login

Simple: because std utils are programs that do what they supposed to do. if problems bound are well within the definition domain of a std util then its all good. Supportability and Extensibility is way too generic for you to draw a line saying std utils can handle them all. After all, they are programs, not programming languages.


Quite the opposite, and, quite simple: engineers over-engineer thing in order to make things generic. and generic make solutions robust. that's basic science. Unless the problem and solution are well understood, your investment won't guarantee a return at all.


Generic, by default, does not in any way make things more robust. We've gone from engineering solutions to meet specific problems to engineering solution frameworks that (supposedly) will solve the problem and allow for any unknowns. The problem is, no matter how hard the engineer tries, he can never anticipate the unknowns to the extent that the application framework can support all of them. We should go back to solving the specific problem at hand. In both scenarios you get the customer who wants a feature that absolutely doesn't fit with the current application, therefore a rewrite is necessary. And with the specific solution, you don't have nearly the man hours wasted.


No, developers over-engineer because setting up a 20-node Hadoop cluster is fun, whereas doing the same task in an hour in Excel means you have to move onto some other boring task.

Generic doesn't mean robust either, I don't know where you got that from,the two concepts are entirely unrelated.


Generic -> robust. i... i dont know how to explain that. honestly i haven't thought about the necessity of explaining things like this. its... basic mathematics.


I don't think these words mean what you think they mean. Like "science" and "mathematics".


I'm sorry, but if you cannot explain it, you simply do not understand it yourself. That's harsh, I get it, and I'm truly sorry, but that's a basic fact.


Generic != Robust.

It can quite easily be the opposite, they are certainly orthogonal concepts.


This smacks of an unexamined bias. Or maybe we're not using the words to mean the same things?


No. Look to safety-critical software for intuition on why.

Simpler is more reliable. Also, it's hard to know enough about a problem to make a generic solution until you've solved the problem 2-3 times already. But ... having solved a problem multiple times increases the risk that you will be biased towards seeing new problems as some instance of the old problem and therefore applying unsuitable "generic" solutions.


I can imagine that those AKs are just the front. There might be someone or some organizations that sponsor the extremists. Money or otherwise. People who might benefit from instability, hatred towards the US etc.


If you know any of the back story of those names you would have known that none of them would need to affiliate with any company. They are basically the deity of our age. Without them we would not have modern computers and the only handhelds we have are rocks.


Yet, affiliate they have, which makes this inappropriate, regardless of their accomplishments.


Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: