There's nothing wrong with assert, that's what I use for checking conditions as well. The framework posted is just a thin facade on top of regular functions and asserts to provide fixtures, dynamic grouping and benchmarks. Knowing how long a specific set of tests take to run for N repetitions is useful information. Since I wrote the test, I know exactly how many times the tested API is called. This is about spotting problems and trends early, once I find something interesting I'll drop down to profiling.
We couldn't disagree more if we tried ;) I've had way worse experiences with over-engineered, off-the-shelf, general-purpose solutions; there is plenty of room for simplification. And there's nothing wrong with owning your code, especially for something as fundamental as testing. The framework presented in the post clocks in at 300 lines of C, there's not much to document really. I would prefer spending my energy elsewhere, but uUnit and others lack what I consider fundamental features and try too hard to steal the show.
I don't have all the answers, that's not required for raising questions. What we're doing right now is leading us down the drain fast. Advertising is about creating problems, period; and if it's one thing we don't need right now, it's more problems. Further, the proven driver for true motivation and satisfaction is mastery; doing something well; we all know this deep inside, but the contrast is too much to deal with; still, that's exactly where we need to go.
No one ever promised it was going to be easy, convenience is one of the drugs we've been hooked on. The truth is that we're not victims to circumstances; once we snap out of it, we can do whatever we feel like; create exactly the kind of life and world we want. So lack of power isn't really the problem, the problem is fear; fear of challenging the status quo, of stepping out of line, of taking risks; fear of living.
Having a clue about how it all fits together is definitely a good idea, always was. But this is more about pushing the software developer profession further into mediocre generalist land, where those pesky computer magicians are reduced to convenient corporate building blocks.
Different approach. The whole idea of full stack developers is a corporate wet dream; they managed to reduce the developer role into something that looks more like a janitor, someone who takes care of everything that no one else wants to deal with. It's been proven over and over again that mastery is what really drives motivation and satisfaction, being really good at what you're doing; but corporate a-holes couldn't care less about humans except as means for more awesome profits.
The way you're framing it sounds like we don't have any alternatives to continuing down this road; from my perspective; this is the future we are creating by not considering options. We didn't come up with these backward ideas, bullshit wears suits. We're the ones we've been waiting for; it's up to us to change this into something better, and that starts with considering options.
I'm not arguing that it can't be done, I too have seen plenty of examples. I'm saying that it's not leading anywhere, individually or collectively; which is why I suggest focusing on substance instead and seeing where that leads us. I believe the problem is that the general public have no clue about what's possible, and we're not doing a very good job at showing them by producing more of the same crap.
Sympathy doesn't help, what we need to get out of here is action. Most people agree we're going nowhere fast, but precious few are willing to step out of line and change anything to break the loop. I don't know the answers, but any option is better than what we have now.
What happened to building great software, providing great service and letting the rest flow from there? Monetization strategy; what is that, really? How is that ever going to lead anywhere that matters? Not that I don't have the same issues, I too am trying hard to find a way to survive in this mess of a world; but I'm convinced it all starts with doing the right thing, which rules out advertisement bullshit for me.
Hacker News is nothing but a censored echo chamber, pretending otherwise at this point is pure ignorance. Anything that doesn't fit the narrative will be beaten down or removed.
So this one is insane, but the previous ones were completely sane; and the reason is that he thinks his enemies within the system might have wire-tapped him. I'd say it's more crazy to not assume that happened given what we know about US "intelligence". Warrants? Seriously? Like legal oversight has even been on the radar lately for the CIA/NSA/whatever; they do whatever they want, however they see fit, and get away with it.
What I'm reading is mostly management directives for getting a bunch of code monkeys to produce code in the safest, most generic and repeatable way possible; by enforcing the lowest common denominator. Given a sound team culture, not using the full power of tools and limiting output to dumbed down templates are anti-patterns; it's not like the job isn't difficult enough the way it is.
Like someone said, every time I write Forth or Lisp :)
So I took the next logical step and implemented Forth in Lisp (https://github.com/codr4life/foonline). Why? Because it gives me more leverage, it's like having one more dimension on top of macros. The other reason is that it gives me facts to go with opinions on language design, allows me to see the compromises others made in a new light.
While that's how it's supposed to work in theory; do you really still buy into that bullshit? You can't see how that's just another excuse to let the rich keep raping the world at their convenience? Ever been to Lisbon? I swear half the city is vacant by now, all the old beautiful buildings; and poor people have less money than ever.
I have a broken spine from a 10 yo climbing accident, with a smashed vertibrae and splinters sticking into the spinal column. I was prescribed Oxy after surgery, spent a month on them and then went through hell and back to get off the shit. I swore to never, ever touch anything from Big Pharma again. Since then, I've been happily puffing my pain away when needed. The whole 'illegalize to protect the people' is so obviously a scam. It's a sacred, healing plant.
I'm sorry; this is not about PR, and not about getting caught. This is about the leaders of our most admired and successful companies being assholes who couldn't care less about anything but power and profit. And it's changing, right now; because we're reaching the point where people had enough of the bullshit.
I've followed Bill around, bad trees don't give good fruit; just because the information comes from a non-bought source and contradicts what you imagined to be true; that doesn't make it fake or turn the comment into trolling.
I'm fine with using ideas that make sense and rejecting the ones that don't. It's still solid advice for API design, and the most successful approach we've come up with. Doing REST to the letter always turns into some kind of modern art installation with lots of hammers looking for nails; this is the technology department, religion is down the corridor. I have full confidence that the authors considered these ideas, not laws.
I agree that it's potentially useful, but it also adds it's share of complexity to any implementation I've come across. And most proposed uses I've seen do not obviously benefit from the idempotent approach, from my experience it often complicates the server implementation. I've found using the REST approach for URLs, separating reads from writes and using status codes a good compromise.
I'm going to have to call bullshit on that one. REST is one of the more successful strategies we've come up with for connecting systems, this is just another case of letting perfect stand in the way of good enough. Using GET for non-destructive operations and POST for updates and deletes is a nice, portable compromise. I've been trying hard for years to find a reason to bother with PUT, but so far I've found it not worth the effort.
Where is your trust in basic human values? The behavior you see around you is an effect of pressure from a completely artificial and destructive environment, regardless of what it's called. Using communism as some kind of crucifix for killing every suggestion of change is not working any more; change is coming, like it or not.
Why not? They're tools, not fashion items. If you dig a bit deeper you'll find an entire category of people writing software using powerful, mature tools. The reason it's not as commercially feasible is that most problems are not really that difficult any more. And since the software won't break every three months because of moving targets, no one will call for your help once it's in place.