In the past, I've been asked about my thoughts on conferences and the potential "death" of conferences, and the question came up again more recently in a social setting. It's been a while since I commented on it, and if anything, my thoughts have only gotten sharper and clearer. On speaking professionally When you go to the dentist's office, who do you want holding the drill--the "enthused, excited amateur", or the "practiced professional"?
Curious to know what Ted's been up to? Head on over to here and sign up. Yes, I'm a CTO of a bootstrap startup. (Emphasis on the "bootstrap" part of that--always looking for angel investors!) And no, we're not really in "stealth mode", I'll be happy to tell you what we're doing if you drop me an email directly; we're just trying to "manage the message", in startup lingo. We're only going to be under wraps for a few more weeks before the real site is live.
By this point, everybody who's even within shouting distance of a device connected to the Internet has heard the news: Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft, is on his way out, retiring somewhere in the next twelve months and stepping aside to allow someone else to run the firm. And, rumor has it, this was not his choice, but a decision enforced upon the firm by the Microsoft Board. You know, as much as I've disagreed with some of the decisions that've come out of the company in the last five years or so, I can't help but feel a twinge of sadness for how this ended.
Apparently I have become something of a resource on programming interviews: I've had three people tell me they read the last two blog posts, one because his company is hiring and he wants his people to be doing interviews right, and two more expressing shock that I still get interviewed--which I don't really think is all that fair, more on that in a moment--and relief that it's not just them getting grilled on areas that they don't believe to be relevant to the job--and more on that in a moment, too.
Although it seems to have dipped somewhat in recent years, periodically I get requests from conferences or webinars or other presentation-oriented organizations/events that demand that the material I present be "exclusive", usually meaning that I've never delivered said content at any other organized event (conference or what-have-you). And, almost without exception, I refuse to speak at those events, or else refuse to abide by the "exclusive" tag (and let them decide whether they still want me to speak for them).
A couple of people had asked how the story with the company that triggered the "I Hate Programming Tests" post ended, so I figured I'd follow up with the rest of that story, and some thoughts. After handing in the disjoint-set solution I'd come up with, the VP pondered things for a bit, then decided to bring me in for an in-person interview loop with a half-dozen of the others that work there.
It's official: I hate them. Don't get me wrong, I understand their use and the reasons why potential employers give them out. There's enough programmers in the world who aren't really skilled enough for the job (whatever that job may be) that it becomes necessary to offer some kind of litmus test that a potential job-seeker must pass. I get that. And it's not like all the programming tests in the world are created equal: some are pretty useful ways to demonstrate basic programming facilities, a la the FizzBuzz problem.
With my most recent blog post, some of you were a little less than impressed with the idea of using types, One reader, in particular, suggested that: Your encapsulating type aliases don't... encapsulate :| Actually, it kinda does. But not in the way you described. using X = qualified.type; merely introduces an alias, and will consequently (a) not prevent assignment of a FirstName to a LastName (b) not even be detectible as such from CLI metadata (i.e.
Are you one of those developers who can’t get his/her boss to let you download/prototype/use a Really Cool™ software package that happens to be open-source? Here’s a possible reason why. For no reason in particular, after installing Cygwin on an old laptop onto which I just dropped Win7, I decided to also drop MinGW32, Cygwin’s main competitor in the “UNIX-on-Windows” space. Wander off to the home page, grab an installer, read the “Getting Started” instructions, and….
Recently, having been teaching C# for a bit at Bellevue College, I’ve been thinking more and more about the way in which we approach building object-oriented programs, and particularly the debates around types and type systems. I think, not surprisingly, that the way in which the vast majority of the O-O developers in the world approach types and when/how they use them is flat wrong—both in terms of the times when they create classes when they shouldn’t (or shouldn’t have to, anyway, though obviously this is partly a measure of their language), and the times when they should create classes and don’t.