Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
The Phlegmatist
Nov 24, 2003

meatpotato posted:

What software area requires a medical examination???

Candidate, we must discover your suitability for coding horrors.

*pipes C style casts in C++ code directly into your brain*

We have determined you unsuitable for our needs. Move along.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

The Phlegmatist
Nov 24, 2003

Jaded Burnout posted:

I'm gonna say no. Learning Elixir and OTP is not a bad idea because it's getting kinda hot and could well be the new Ruby in terms of jobs for the next 10 years, but the concurrency offered by BEAM languages is so different to most stacks that you're not going to get a lot of use out of it except for when the whole team's really into it. People don't want snowflake apps in their systems even if it's the right tool for the job, and a highly concurrent distributed language is not much use without a highly concurrent distributed database to go with it.

Agreed. I love Elixir/Phoenix (and this seems to be where most Rails devs are going) but the job market for it seem to be nonexistent at the moment.

Scalability is an architectural issue foremost and it's difficult to shoehorn it in to an existing codebase. If you're asked "how can we make this legacy code more scalable" then the answer is lol good luck. But if you were designing something new I'd start with microservices. It's great horizontal scalability but you pay for it in deployment complexity.

e: LinkedIn has a good write-up on their horrifying scaling issues and why they developed Kafka

The Phlegmatist fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Feb 8, 2018

The Phlegmatist
Nov 24, 2003

Good Will Hrunting posted:

I'm trying to dig up the quote from my boss about rewriting Kafka

Hmm yes this thing that's open source and used by thousands of companies in production...

We need to rewrite it so that we can neglect to maintain a special forked version that will give us no end of technical debt. Also I am a project manager so I know what I'm doing.

(this mindset is why we have Boost-but-not libraries in our codebase)

The Phlegmatist
Nov 24, 2003
convention over configuration, I say as I fart into a bag and then huff my own farts

(the elixir community is better than the C++ community which is not saying...much. but it's true)

The Phlegmatist
Nov 24, 2003

2nd Rate Poster posted:

I started my "functional" programming experience with Perl for God's sake, and eventually landed in what I thought was my neck beard dream job doing elixir/erlang all day.

I thought embedded Common Lisp was going to be my dream job and then I realized...it was a nightmare because who the gently caress is insane enough to use Common Lisp for embedded platforms. My boss.

Lisp is really good though. The workflow of writing small functions and testing them in the REPL and then copy-pasting them as unit tests is amazing.

But as far as the person who wants to "get" functional programming I'd recommend Haskell or Scala (...which allows Java developers to poo poo Haskellisms all over your codebase)

e: Kotlin isn't a functional programming language btw, it's really good but it's mostly Java meets C++ with less bad design decisions and boilerplate code

The Phlegmatist fucked around with this message at 00:22 on Feb 9, 2018

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

The Phlegmatist
Nov 24, 2003

Pollyanna posted:

Got an interview with a company that seems to do primarily high interest loans, and I’m not sure what to think of it.

I'd refuse to work for them as a matter of principle.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply