241 karma · joined June 9, 2010
Not a problem for me, but I'm sure a lot of people would complain.
To this day i'm still not sure what would be better: telling my boss "sorry, but if we want feature y, it will take 2 months (but it will we done right)" or "yes we can do that in 2 days but don't expect the code to be pretty"
I see your point, but I think that if the whole deregulation (and thus free market) hadn't happened, a lot of the damage could have been avoided.
It has a place, it can be useful, but I thoroughly detest it.
Also, all our communications (website, snail-mail letters) use our corporate branding. So why not use it in our emails?
Can anybody explain?
[edit] And your own reasoning ofcourse.
Didn't know what HIPAA meant, but apparently they are certified for storing medical stuff.
Second of all, according to Amazon PR speak this failure should not be possible. Every person in IT worth their salt should know PR speak is not to be trusted. Being reliant on AWS for your average business app is completely okay though. However, hosting apps which might endanger peoples lives on black box technology over which you have little influence is moronic imo.
Last but not least I seriously question the privacy implications of this. Hosting parts of your medical app in the cloud is fine and I don't know the details of this app, but I wouldn't be happy to know that my medical history is stored by some third party I don't entirely trust with such sensitive data.
I'm probably the minority though, so business wise it makes sense.
Of course if your language is entirely OO (like C# or Java), you can't avoid constructs like Math.Sin(). Even though I prefer C# and Java above PHP, it has always annoyed me that I needed to prefix those kind of functions with a class name. I understand that it is a trade off in language design and forcing you to think in objects is mostly a good thing (if you leave functional programming out of the equation). However, if your language supports functions outside of objects, why not use them?
[disclaimer]I didn't look at the actual code, so I'm not sure if there are functions that indeed should have been (static) members of a class.[/disclaimer]
Human languages defines what concepts we are able to think and reason about. I believe that George Orwell showed this perfectly in 1984. By taking away a lot of vocabulary, you are taking away a lot of ways of to express yourself. I think that the term "expression" in regards to programming languages explains why this is important.
I only know Dutch, English and Latin (plus just enough German and French to get around when I´m buying a bread or asking for directions) so in no way I've experienced how a language like Mandarin changes the way in which your thoughts take shape. However, I did have the experience of playing around with Haskell and Lisp (not saying I'm experienced or whatever, I've just toyed around with them in my free time) and they did change some things of how I percieve and think about code. I can´t write code in these languages where I work, but just learning them (and learning their different, but just as valid, viewpont on programming) has changed the way I think about some problems and how I should solve some problems.
Language (whether it's human or programming) is all about expressing ideas in the broadest sense of the word. Knowing more just let's you express more...
Isn't that what computing is all about?