orderlyoctopus

5 ms·

1.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
I really disagree with Microsoft's approach of homogenizing their products, and this is a perfect example. - There's never a need for "Microsoft" documentation -- you'll have a question with a specific product or se
2.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
If I ever get up the nerve to give it a real try, I will certainly test the slack's patience for stupid questions :) The .NET reference is useful if you are reading through code and maybe to modify it slightly, but I find it (and class
3.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
Curious about this also. Last time I took a peek at F# I wanted to make a simple game, but all the compatible tools seemed like C# tools that allegedly work for F# as well. Wound up using Lua/LOVE instead.
4.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
It's very hard to do it along the way if you aren't familiar with C# either. Now you're struggling to get your head around both paradigms as well as however the thing you're trying to do works. I doubt I would have ever
5.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
Definitely. Understanding Clojure/Java interop to consume a library requires that you understand both Clojure and Java far more than you would need to if you were to consume a library native to whatever you were using.
6.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
I definitely agree. Trying to jump into F# without any knowledge of .NET just requires so much mind-juggling. As a beginner, so much of the difficulty and frustration comes from the fact that you are missing so much foundation knowledge tha
7.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
The two lessons from this: - Microsoft got so good and prolific at fighting on their terrain, they overspecialized and forgot how to win anywhere else. Once their opponents stopped stepping on their terrain, MS started losing. - There'
8.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
I always liked orthodox and unorthodox. I think there are lessons when Sun Tzu discusses cheng/chi that are somewhat orthogonal to the OODA loop, but I see the stated interpretation by porpoisemonkey as a "subset". Lulling yo
9.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
In a perfect information, turn-based game like Chess, there are no secrets. You know where all the pieces are, who moves what when, and the goal each person has. Direct subterfuge is simply not possible. Chess masters use unpredictability,
10.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
Came to say this. A head to head game in the vacuum of a single match, like, say, Chess or Go or Starcraft, is conducive to certain kinds of strategies. You have one opponent and no teammates. Your win is his loss. It's black and white
11.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
Certain to Win is very good. There's also sort of an "anthology" book on Boyd/OODA called Science, Strategy, and War by Osinga. You can find some other random content on dnipogo.org and in the web archive for belisarius.
12.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
I remember noticing Vuejs using the issue tracker for documentation in the lead up to their release of 2.0. FreeBSD also does this, which will surprise no one who has ever read the FreeBSD docs. Also, one of the reasons I asked this questio
13.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
This is how I've thought of it as well, why I've been hesitant to do much more so far, and why I'm polling a forum with lots of different maintainers rather than a single person at a single project already. Because of my skil
14.
by orderlyoctopus 10y ago
Do you think there's room for contributors to OSS outside filing bugs and making pull requests? I'm a technical product/project manager by day and a hobby programmer by night. Things like writing documentation, triaging issue