Thursday, April 26, 2007

96th post: a look at some past comments

96 posts. Wowzers. To celebrate, here's some links to past blog comments that I found most memorable:
  • First comment. I was able to track down a problem in my KnoppMyth installation with some rather unimpressive tactics, but the root cause wasn't obvious so I posted my findings for others to find. And it helped someone! It never hurts to help!
  • Comment from Neal Gafter. I linked and commented about a blog entry someone else wrote about Java closures. Neal, in turn, commented on my lil' blog. (My feelings since then are if you want to use closures, why not just use Groovy?)
  • Haskell comment. Back before I had read more about Haskell, I was still on the fence as to whether it was too complicated to learn/grok. I linked to the commenter's blog as an example of hard Haskell code, which led to a fully-justified comment that more or less said, "The Haskell code wasn't the hard part at all. The hard part was the subject matter. It's to Haskell's credit that the code didn't need to be more complicated." Good call.
  • Abacus manual comment from Totton Heffelfinger. My post about the abacus linked to an online manual, along with some honest words about how much I liked it. The author thanked me.
  • Comments to "the worst interview question". Touched a nerve, did I? On one hand, having a blog entry on reddit is living the blogger dream: being published (and others online taking some valuable time to read what was published). On the other hand, the blog entry that appeared on reddit was an entry I barely spent any time or effort on, nor was it particularly insightful or deep. Que sera, sera.

2 comments:

  1. "My feelings since then are if you want to use closures, why not just use Groovy?"

    I don't have the freedom to switch back and forth between languages every few lines of code. Besides, Groovy's closures are not nearly as expressive as those being proposed for Java.

    ReplyDelete
  2. To clarify:
    My feelings since then are if you want to use closures now, why not just use Groovy?

    I lean toward the "languages should evolve over time" camp, so I support any initiatives to make Java a better language. (There's another target audience for Java, known as "Mort" in Microsoft terms, for whom some language designers try to keep the syntax minimal so it's easy to learn.) Groovy, in fact, received a lot of early bad press because its initial releases (pre-JSR) needed some more thought-evolution.

    True, switching back and forth between languages every few lines of code would be a maintenance nightmare. Maybe it makes sense to treat Groovy/Java integration like I've heard of people treating Python/C integration: code in Groovy/Python at first (faster prototyping), then profile the code and replace the slowest or most-frequently-ran sections with Java/C. Actually, the wealth of libraries for Java means that the Groovy portion might not need to be that great anyway.

    ReplyDelete