Algorithmic Dada

Coding, the nihilistic way

[algorithmicdada]

Quick! Write a binary search function!

The challenge

Write a binary search function that takes a value and a list of integers and returns true or false depending on whether the value is found in the list or not. Use your favorite language The rules

You have 10 minutes

Use tests to confirm that it works

You can't use any reference. No books or google allowed

People who studied binary search in the last two months can't participate

Break any of the rules, and you have lost. Go!

[algorithmicdada]

It is looking better and better.

[algorithmicdada]

This looks interesting. I was thinking of bending Jekyll to do turn into something like middleman. Perhaps middle man can do what I want out of the box? We will see

[algorithmicdada]

tables are still easier for layout than css

Html was a conceptual mess that mixed document description tags with styling tags. So when we realized that html was super important, people spent time cleaning it up to take out all of the typographical tags and place them in CSS instead. From this work we get how we shouldn't use <table> for layout. And it is a good argument. <table> implies that we are about to see data. But there is no data when you use it for layout.  So we should use CSS. Yet it worked out the using pure CSS to create layout sucks. Anyone can learn and remember how to properly make a banner, three column, footer layout with tables in about 20 minutes. Most developers will have to look up, again and again, how do you create those three column layouts with CSS whenever they start a new project. I feel that had the early creators of html used the word "grid" rather than table, most of the theological fights would have been avoided. Tables are a specific form of a grid. So why would you create a <grid> tag? Most people can easily tell when you use <table> for layout vs <table> for data in any case. A grid is the right metaphor for layout. This is confirmed by the fact that MS included grids as layout element in XAML. It is such a good metaphor, that Google did the same for their Android mark up language. And finally Bootstrap's model relies on the concept of a grid. But consider this: we went from using a built-in element that is simple to understand to using a style sheet framework that more or less simulates what tables used to do, but doing it in a theologically approved way. Bootstrap is a lot more than just a css table simulator, but it we shouldn't ignore that that is one of its most appealing features. It would be ideal if in the future html will support a <grid> element. In the mean time many people will secretly  keep using tables to quickly implement layout so that they can spend their development time focused on business goals.

[algorithmicdada]

The hot new patterns data reporting framework

[algorithmicdada]

8 Bit Music: How To Create Chiptunes Quick, Easy, Free

Here lies a basic tutorial demonstrating how easy it is to get retro and down with the bits of 8. A quick download and you'll be a chiptune producer in minut...

[algorithmicdada]

"Coding IS my religion" -- this is how to explain your job to the heathens

[algorithmicdada]

The religious nature of software development culture

A few days ago I had an insight: software development is a deeply religious practice, and we discuss it in terms of religion. We see ourselves as wizards and gurus. Gurus are teachers, often religious. Wizards are our modern name for shamans, essentially religious people who can operate on the spirits of nature.  We sometimes talk about how coding is writing incantations. And we demand an environment where we won't be interrupted from our meditative work. People will state without irony how they wish the workplace would give them a cell and everyone will have a vow of silence for hour a day.  We talk about purity of our functions. We have evangelizers of technology. We have revivals in the form of software conferences. We fight about which text-editor is better and  which language is better.  Our faiths are our working language of language of choice. People who worked on a unpopular language will apologize for doing so if she ever admits to have worked on that platform.  And just like religion has some forbidden knowledge, so does programming. I read on Stack Overflow someone telling a person who was thinking about learning Cobol: "learn it, but never tell anyone about it." Because Cobol is equivalent on dabbling in black magic and the dark arts. And all of this in the name of moving data from point A, transforming it, and putting it in point B. Since the actual labor is absurd, our love for it must be religious. 

[lovelikejinki]

The Imitation Game poster.

[algorithmicdada]

[algorithmicdada]

Now your dream to code like it is 1959 has become a reality.

[algorithmicdada]

Sinfully using mocks when it's useful

The prophet rises and declares "the purpose of unit is to test a component as a black box testing its interface! Mocks test implementation! Mocks are not pure!" But what if the interaction between objects IS important?  If we seek delivering on time, mocks can be useful. If we seek purity and salvation, we should avoid them.  What to do then? In general, avoid them, unless it is important to test the interactions and testing the interactions give you better piece of mind.  Call them "simulated integration tests" if you work with a holy man. 

[algorithmicdada]

Back to TDD

A day filled with TDD

[algorithmicdada]

Programming is applied nihilism

[algorithmicdada]

This is where one can learn how to use ready-made code rules

[algorithmicdada]

Continuous Integration with Visual Studio online

[algorithmicdada]

So is COBOL dead or not?

COBOL is like a 90-year-celebrity: we have mourned its death many times, only to realizes that the person is still alive. Every so often tech journalism runs a feature about how COBOL is not really dead. There is a secret vibrant COBOL programming community thriving on the billions and billions of COBOL code. Then the comments for these threads follow this patterns: someone claiming to be a COBOL programmer talking about their work life; a string of former COBOL programmers talking about how much they hated the language; and a cynical poster pointing out that the stories about COBOL's survival are all being pushed as PR stories by the mysterious companies that still create COBOL compilers company. This is truly a topic that engenders the greatest apathy, so I have yet to find a story on tech journalism to debunk or confirm the claims of the longevity of COBOL. Overall, it seems that people hear COBOL, yawn, and go back to playing Candy Crush. Thus I must investigate and get to the bottom of it. What is