Well, it's now January 1st, and it's time for the obligatory New Year's post about resolutions, plans, and so on.
What, you thought I was going to do something different?
So here are my plans:
Professionally - improve my coding skills; work more on getting testing infrastructures built around my work code; start learning more about the other areas of The Job's new products; build something useful to the public in Python; learn more about VMs and use of the cloud.
Personally - sustain an exercise program for more than 2 months; work on my photography project; declutter the house (at least one item per day disposed of by trash, sale, recycling, or reuse); blog at least once a week; write some fiction every month.
Socially - well, let's just say I need to see how much time I have left after doing all of the other things.
I'll post later with the list of specific things of interest to technical types.
Tuesday, January 01, 2013
Tuesday, November 06, 2012
...Is An Onrushing Train
So in addition to the usual chaos this time of year, The Job decided to throw a curve.
Apparently, someone managed to completely ignore a feature that had been discussed several months ago, and suddenly realized that it was very close to the deadline. So instead of owning up and saying "Well, we need to postpone the drop to get his feature in", they asked me to crank out a solution. Then they nattered away 4 days of a 10 day deadline on side issues. And then I find that the interface I was to use is already implemented elsewhere, and this should have been noticed during the initial discussion!
And the owner of that subsystem is "too busy", so I get tapped to redo all my work in the new processes, in 3 days, instead of 10.
*And* all this is after getting a sub-par review.....
You can bet this is being noted for future reference in next year's review.
Apparently, someone managed to completely ignore a feature that had been discussed several months ago, and suddenly realized that it was very close to the deadline. So instead of owning up and saying "Well, we need to postpone the drop to get his feature in", they asked me to crank out a solution. Then they nattered away 4 days of a 10 day deadline on side issues. And then I find that the interface I was to use is already implemented elsewhere, and this should have been noticed during the initial discussion!
And the owner of that subsystem is "too busy", so I get tapped to redo all my work in the new processes, in 3 days, instead of 10.
*And* all this is after getting a sub-par review.....
You can bet this is being noted for future reference in next year's review.
Monday, November 05, 2012
When Google Calls
Well, the Gods of Computing briefly smiled on me, and then got all frowny and stabby....
Google called and wanted to consider me for a position once more. I had to go through another phone interview, and after apparently failing that, got a second chance, which I then failed again.
So the advice I have for folks interviewing with Google is:
Don't implement the naive solution to the problem - that appears to be less-than-acceptable. Discuss the naive solution while you think of a more elegant solution, one that uses a suitable data structure
Monday, October 08, 2012
Missing the point of education
I wonder if the US Business Managers have seen this story about Indian college students outsourcing their senior projects; or as we call it here in the US, cheating. Hell there is even a cottage industry providing these products, and the article mentions that the local costs have spiraled, so people are starting to provide the same products from cheaper areas.
But what I did not see in the article is even a hint of moral outrage or guilt about this - not from the students, not from the project providers, and not from the journalist who wrote the article.
But what I did not see in the article is even a hint of moral outrage or guilt about this - not from the students, not from the project providers, and not from the journalist who wrote the article.
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
Keeping My Chin Up
I realized two things today. First, when I take work-related classes, I get in a weird stressy, bummed out mood; and second, why I get in that mood.
I get that mood because all the neat things I learn in these classes is basically unused. I am trying to keep up with new tech, but The Job doesn't want to use new tech in the areas I work in.
It's kinda like window shopping for food.
I get that mood because all the neat things I learn in these classes is basically unused. I am trying to keep up with new tech, but The Job doesn't want to use new tech in the areas I work in.
It's kinda like window shopping for food.
Friday, August 10, 2012
Paradigm Envy
I read a lot in the past few years about Continuous Deployment, and I finally realized what about it seemed odd - I've spent most of my career working on systems that were not web-based, but installed individually at customer sites. So all those wonderful ideas about rolling out new code on the fly just don't apply to me.
And I really envy those developers who can use it - you avoid all the hassles - customers who never upgrade; customers who want fixes in the new releases backported to their current release; customers who want you to fix the problem, but not change any code, since they have to test for 6 months before deploying code.
Maybe someday I'll get the chance to work on a system that CD will be applicable
And I really envy those developers who can use it - you avoid all the hassles - customers who never upgrade; customers who want fixes in the new releases backported to their current release; customers who want you to fix the problem, but not change any code, since they have to test for 6 months before deploying code.
Maybe someday I'll get the chance to work on a system that CD will be applicable
Thursday, August 09, 2012
Naming Names
In What's In A Name? I addressed a common problem - the naming of functions. I suggested that predicate functions be named so that reading the code aloud is comprehensible.
Today, I realized that there is a corollary that applies to a common type of function, the setter.
Often you have a setter function that has a small set of values, typically a binary flag. There are two common schemes for getting/setting the flag - set(flag,. value) + getFlag(), and setFlag() , clearFlag().
From a code comprehension standpoint, the latter is better. You can read the code and no matter what the value is, know if the flag is set or clear. No more having to search back in the code when you see:
setFlag(someVar);
to see if someVar is True or False. You know immediately at that point how the flag is set.
Now, you will probably need a getter still, since you will likely need to printout the value, at least, but the cognitive easing of this will be good for you, your successors, and your code.
Today, I realized that there is a corollary that applies to a common type of function, the setter.
Often you have a setter function that has a small set of values, typically a binary flag. There are two common schemes for getting/setting the flag - set(flag,. value) + getFlag(), and setFlag() , clearFlag().
From a code comprehension standpoint, the latter is better. You can read the code and no matter what the value is, know if the flag is set or clear. No more having to search back in the code when you see:
setFlag(someVar);
to see if someVar is True or False. You know immediately at that point how the flag is set.
Now, you will probably need a getter still, since you will likely need to printout the value, at least, but the cognitive easing of this will be good for you, your successors, and your code.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)