1,132 reputation
722
bio website accelerando.euweb.cz
location Prague, Czech Republic
age 52
visits member for 3 years
seen Dec 15 at 9:04

Senior developer, algorithms master, PM, analyst, applied mathematician.

The Three Little Daughters Raiser

Hobbies:
logics, history, psychology, sociology, pedagogics, photo, cycling, hiking.

In past:
space-/astro- geodesist, cartographer, astronomer, teacher, radiometrist on the liquidation of the Chernobyl catastrophe in 1986.


Feb
25
comment How to address the concerns of the software architect but still maintain collective code ownership?
@Mr.Mindor "...code reviews can only help..." Without any doubt. But they are not enough. And this post insists that they are ALL we need.
Feb
25
comment How to address the concerns of the software architect but still maintain collective code ownership?
I agree this may be enough in a normal project. But if the project already HAS bad architecture so that components are too often dependent on each other? And in this case IMHO, we have to choose carefully who will do which code check.
Feb
25
comment How to address the concerns of the software architect but still maintain collective code ownership?
@Disco3 The connection A-B could be easily found by 'b' only. Who will tell the programmer 'c' that he should check THESE TWO components?
Feb
25
comment How to address the concerns of the software architect but still maintain collective code ownership?
@Plutor You want every piece of code to be checked by every programmer in the group? If yes, it is impossible, if no, where is the profit?
Feb
25
answered How to address the concerns of the software architect but still maintain collective code ownership?
Feb
25
comment How to address the concerns of the software architect but still maintain collective code ownership?
Let's many programmers a,b,c,d,... made components A,B,C,D.... Now the programmer 'a' wants to make a change in his component A that will cause a problem in the component B. Programmer 'a' doesn't know about it. I his code would be checked by the programmer 'b', everything is OK, the problems will be found. But the code checker was chozen arbitrary. So, with the great probability it won't help. How this could help the QA with his problem?
Feb
25
comment Why are scientific programming languages so weird?
@phresnel sorry, look better this one: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoare_logic#Assignment_axiom_schema
Feb
25
comment Why are scientific programming languages so weird?
let us continue this discussion in chat
Feb
25
comment Why are scientific programming languages so weird?
@phresnel Of course, it IS the assignment.
Feb
25
comment Why are scientific programming languages so weird?
@StevenBurnap Very interesting. I had worked on similar machine-level language. It is a powerful and complex way programming.
Feb
25
comment Why are scientific programming languages so weird?
@phresnel Math, among other divisions, has logic. And logic, among other divisions, has formal systems theory. These ones HAVE assignment operators. At my university and books that I had read, it looked as '→'. And surely, it couldn't be '=', as the meaning of the last was set long ago.
Feb
24
comment Why are scientific programming languages so weird?
@StevenBurnap Wow! stupid me! And I thought it was a dialect of FORTRAN, due to the similarity of the name. I'll look at it. Thank you for the info... Lower level than C - possible. But was it more powerful? Why it lost to C?
Feb
24
answered Stopping spiders or unauthorised users from viewing files
Feb
24
revised Why are scientific programming languages so weird?
edited body
Feb
24
comment Why are scientific programming languages so weird?
@okiharaherbst I am glad to speak on such interesting theme and I thought I am teasing you... There are millions of paper books printed on the word. But alas - they are far less modern than e-books. The times in IT changes so quickly that all four generations of IT languages live side by side. Assembler, Fortran, C, Java+Spring... Another thought - FORTRAN 1957 and Fortran 2008 with Recursive allocatable components are dammed different!
Feb
24
revised Why are scientific programming languages so weird?
added 547 characters in body
Feb
24
comment Why are scientific programming languages so weird?
@okiharaherbst These old languages were different, because the programmers in 50-60-ties and up from 70-ties were/are different. Then programming was art and now it is an industry.
Feb
24
revised Why are scientific programming languages so weird?
added 219 characters in body
Feb
24
comment Why are scientific programming languages so weird?
@StevenBurnap I see. I only wanted to recall that all of them, including Pascal, come from Simula. Simula was the first OOP language. And had features that were hardly realized in all its children. Some of these old languages were fantastic.
Feb
23
comment Why are scientific programming languages so weird?
@StevenBurnap Pascal is a derivative of Simula, not vice versa.