6 ms·
> a three-ring binder called the Prompt File, stuffed with printouts of the dozens of tables in the system, and religiously updated anytime anyone changed anyth
by daanvd 5y ago
> a three-ring binder called the Prompt File, stuffed with printouts of the dozens of tables in the system, and religiously updated anytime anyone changed anything of significance.
Hey, at least they had documentation.
- choeger 5y agoAnd a backup.
- praptak 5y agoI learned to program on programmable calculators. I don't think I have ever reached the ratio of documentation to code that I've had back then. Necessity is the mother of documentation.
- taneq 5y agoPretty hard to write self documenting code when all you have are single letter variables and the language doesn’t support comments.
- praptak 5y agoLetter variables? Luxury! One of the calculator had ops like STO, RCL, PAU, GTO, GSB and some numbered "cells", where you could store the result of the calculation. The other had ops like '74' which were coordinates of the key which activated the given function. Getting the full screen of the ZX Spectrum surely spoiled me :)
- avmich 5y agoYeah, that's why math doesn't have self-documenting theorems, right?
- taneq 5y agoDoes maths have self-documenting theorems? O.o
- eurasiantiger 5y agoGeometrical proofs could be construed as such, even with some propositional logic given that someone comes up with a solid, universal way of expressing it (cf. The Golden Record)
- code_duck 5y agoI’d probably have a parallel file with comments.
- redis_mlc 5y agoWell, as a DBA, I periodically use a 3rd party tool to print out the schema. It's mainly for new hires to learn from. But sometimes I'll flip through it and notice: - mis-spelled table names, usually duplicate tables - missing FKs - missing unique keys, most commonly for early RoR apps - developer-specific EAV tables with 1 row. The benefit always outweighs the dead trees, but printing once a year is typical. Back in the day, more frequenctly on 25-line terminals where there was too much scrolling.
- praptak 5y agoI don't get why this post got into [dead]. Anybody care to explain their reasoning?
- wizzwizz4 5y agoThe user got shadowbanned (apparently automatically).
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- bmn__ 5y agoUser redis_mlc has been shadowbanned for eight months which is an abhorrent practice. He is a prolific contributor, but most readers will never see his comments. Occasionally, a reader with showdead:yes in the options and sufficient karma will "vouch" a post back into general visibility. Note that the verdict by HN moderator dang talks of a regular ban: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25011268 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25011268
- redis_mlc 5y agoIf you read that link in the parent comment, you'll see that my comment was right about the lack of science evident in the WHO and CDC information (I'm usually several months ahead of the leftist narrative.) Just more HN group think, enforced by dang. The facts as of July 18, 2021: 1) The WHO head just reversed his opinion on the lab leak theory in a public statement: Retraction starts @1:20 "WHO head: There was 'premature push' to rule out China's Covid-19 Wuhan lab leak link" - July 16, 2021 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZJHkM7lO7A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZJHkM7lO7A 2) Fauci has admitted funding the Wuhan lab with no meaningful oversight. What he hasn't explained is why the NIH funneled the money through EcoHealth Alliance (Daszak) instead of government-to-government. Some media are calling Daszak "a cutout", meaning he was a link in a chai conspiring to hide the money trail since GoF was banned in the US, but pursued in WIV. 3) Fauci flip-flopped on when and how many masks to wear, so his advice was not guided by science.