Comments for Source Of Failure http://sourceoffailure.wordpress.com A Light-hearted Look at Software (Testing|UX Design|Docs) Mon, 11 Aug 2008 13:08:29 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on Agile ‘08 and the Home Strech by Chuck Esterbrook http://sourceoffailure.wordpress.com/2008/08/10/agile-08-and-the-home-strech/#comment-12 Chuck Esterbrook Mon, 11 Aug 2008 13:08:29 +0000 http://sourceoffailure.wordpress.com/?p=14#comment-12 Guido also deserves much reprieve because the whole 2.x series, which spanned several years, was all about maintaining compatibility while still pushing the language forward. However, there is only so much one can do before legacy architecture constraints must be broken to improve the *language*. Some of the issues that Python 3.0 addresses run much deeper and are more subtle than simple library calls. For example, unifying types and classes. On the other hand, if Python 3.0 is going to break some compatibility, it could have been an opportunity for some real improvements like language-level unit testing and optional static type checking. Alas, most Python 3.0 discussions start out with "print is now a function". Zzzzzz.... Your post caught my eye because it mentions "Cobra anyone?". Well, yes, indeed! I am the author of the Cobra programming language which has the above features and then some. I think it's a more exciting offering than Python 3.0. It's also open source and you can decide for yourself. Guido also deserves much reprieve because the whole 2.x series, which spanned several years, was all about maintaining compatibility while still pushing the language forward. However, there is only so much one can do before legacy architecture constraints must be broken to improve the *language*.

Some of the issues that Python 3.0 addresses run much deeper and are more subtle than simple library calls. For example, unifying types and classes.

On the other hand, if Python 3.0 is going to break some compatibility, it could have been an opportunity for some real improvements like language-level unit testing and optional static type checking. Alas, most Python 3.0 discussions start out with “print is now a function”. Zzzzzz….

Your post caught my eye because it mentions “Cobra anyone?”. Well, yes, indeed! I am the author of the Cobra programming language which has the above features and then some. I think it’s a more exciting offering than Python 3.0.

It’s also open source and you can decide for yourself.

]]> Comment on Programming Gold by Liz http://sourceoffailure.wordpress.com/2008/06/11/programming-gold/#comment-7 Liz Thu, 12 Jun 2008 23:44:45 +0000 http://sourceoffailure.wordpress.com/?p=10#comment-7 Your illustration of the process reminds me of GOMS analysis... see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMN-GOMS for an example. I am really glad I don't have to analyze DrProject in THAT level of detail. :-) Your illustration of the process reminds me of GOMS analysis… see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMN-GOMS for an example.

I am really glad I don’t have to analyze DrProject in THAT level of detail. :-)

]]> Comment on Programming Gold by Qi http://sourceoffailure.wordpress.com/2008/06/11/programming-gold/#comment-6 Qi Thu, 12 Jun 2008 05:45:18 +0000 http://sourceoffailure.wordpress.com/?p=10#comment-6 Speaking about Adobe's monstrosity of CS3, this might be interesting: http://individual.utoronto.ca/qiyang/files/602e63aff0667371b314a2454e2edd21-27.html Speaking about Adobe’s monstrosity of CS3, this might be interesting:
http://individual.utoronto.ca/qiyang/files/602e63aff0667371b314a2454e2edd21-27.html

]]> Comment on Carpentry Without Power Tools by Qi http://sourceoffailure.wordpress.com/2008/05/27/carpentry-without-power-tools/#comment-4 Qi Sat, 31 May 2008 03:29:56 +0000 http://sourceoffailure.wordpress.com/?p=6#comment-4 Yes, which is why these should be hidden intelligently not just the let's-stick-everything-into-menus mentality. Yes, which is why these should be hidden intelligently not just the let’s-stick-everything-into-menus mentality.

]]> Comment on Carpentry Without Power Tools by sourceoffailure http://sourceoffailure.wordpress.com/2008/05/27/carpentry-without-power-tools/#comment-3 sourceoffailure Fri, 30 May 2008 01:30:24 +0000 http://sourceoffailure.wordpress.com/?p=6#comment-3 I agree that the most used features should be made available. I just don't like this: Options->Features->Include->My New Feature to conceal things. More then 2 layers of menus is blasphemy. That's not intuitive. We can't dumbify users: we can hand them their sand-toys, but we should make a full toolkit easily and intuitively availible. I agree that the most used features should be made available. I just don’t like this:

Options->Features->Include->My New Feature to conceal things. More then 2 layers of menus is blasphemy.

That’s not intuitive. We can’t dumbify users: we can hand them their sand-toys, but we should make a full toolkit easily and intuitively availible.

]]> Comment on Carpentry Without Power Tools by Qi http://sourceoffailure.wordpress.com/2008/05/27/carpentry-without-power-tools/#comment-2 Qi Thu, 29 May 2008 22:47:08 +0000 http://sourceoffailure.wordpress.com/?p=6#comment-2 A bit off-topic: Making sure the user can do anything possible [...] is the Only demand of this decade? I beg to differ: to me the urgent demand is carefully picking and presenting only 20% most used feature for 80% of the users, and more importantly hiding the rest intelligently. (Microsoft Word is a bad example) A bit off-topic:
Making sure the user can do anything possible [...] is the Only demand of this decade? I beg to differ: to me the urgent demand is carefully picking and presenting only 20% most used feature for 80% of the users, and more importantly hiding the rest intelligently. (Microsoft Word is a bad example)

]]>