HackerX

By year

2016

Ideas that Hacker News readers were still recommending in 2016.

4 posts cited53 citations

Counts show how many picks Hacker News readers cited in each year, not when the post was written.

@mxcl

Career

@mxcl

View on X
Recommended by 42 HN users
From the Hacker News threadleetcode seems to agree with your definition [0]. the meme isn't to say that inverting a binary tree is particularly difficult - anyone familiar with coding challenges and trees could trivially produce a solution. the meme is more pointing out how ludicrous it is that senior/staff/principal interviews can hinge on these types of problems, despite the engineer proving their proficiency by doing something like running DOOM in typescript types or writing homebrew [1]. [0] leetcode.com/problems/invert-binary-tre…... [1] x.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768@LiquixTypeScript types can run DOOM [video]2025
117

@ID_AA_Carmack

Hardware

@ID_AA_Carmack

View on X
Recommended by 5 HN users
From the Hacker News threadSome of that isn't the text editors fault. With the C64 the keystroke may be on the screen before it out of the USB stack on a modern computer. That is even before you start to consider the latency in the video stack. As John Carmack once noted: "I can send an IP packet to Europe faster than I can send a pixel to the screen. How f’d up is that?" -- twitter.com/id_aa_carmack/status/193480…@jandreseRegression with the C642021
13

@andy_matuschak

Programming

@andy_matuschak

View on X
Recommended by 4 HN users
From the Hacker News threadWell there's nothing absolutely 'wrong' with them. You can write good and bad apps with view controllers (I've done both). But they're an architectural blank slate, mainly offering access to UI objects & lifecycle callbacks. You need some architecture on top in anything but the most trivial app. The naive approach is to have 'no architecture', which actually is an architecture of just throwing masses of state, ad hoc, into the view controller, and using this to effect the UI any old how (so a 3rd party has no idea where to look to find out where things happen). Or you can go maximalist and select from MVC, MVP, etc, all of which are an improvement on the naive approach. It just so happens that I've found RN (React Native) to be the nicest improvement, to my taste. Simple unidirectional data flow & UI state being a simple function of app state make for a beautifully clean and unambiguous model for how everything fits together. One can argue the costs and benefits of app architectures all day, but there's really no substitute for trying them out, for the sake of curiosity & learning. All the devs I know who have written RN groan a bit when they're back in iOS and/or Android native development, and absolutely not because they love javascript! Check out Andy Matuschak's celebrated Tweet on RN (twitter.com/andy_matuschak/status/56051…). I point to it not as an argument from authority. But if one of the people who wrote UIKit thinks RN's model is the superior one, surely that should pique curiosity just a bit? > Are you suggesting React solves the programming language problem completely I'm not sure what you're getting at here. What 'programming language problem'? And why would an improvement have to solve something 'completely' to be of value?@crispinbTakeaways from KotlinConf 20172018
6

More

RSS feed

Keyboard shortcuts