Re: Q: type ... is new String

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 14:20:14 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> On 05.06.12 11:06, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> 
>>> (All I see is subsequences of 2#bbbb_bbbb#. For the AI part,
>>> I am told to produce the most likely information that the
>>> originator might have intended to send.)
>> 
>> Bad design. Don't do that.
> 
> How is producing the most likely information from a piece
> of data bad design?

Good design is not based on likelihood... and information is not
"produced."

> And who am I to say "I don't do that"?

And who are you to say "I do that"?

You, as a programmer, are someone to make decisions. You cannot refrain
from choosing.

>> Do not conflate
>> well-defined functionality, e.g. "send over socket", "render calendar page
>> on the screen" with ill-defined stuff, like what is going on in someone's
>> head.
> 
> What is going on in someone's head is precisely the information
> I am looking for. It so happens that this includes resource
> identifiers, and here, too, I need to guess the right one, because
> the transport layer conveys mistakes, omissions, and
> quadruped-on-the-keyboard-effects correctly.

Really? When last time you saw web page errors caused by the transport?

> And, again, I must rely on guesses in order to construct objects
> from input, and will reconstruct them again, and again.

No, you must not and shall not. This attitude is the core problem: guesses
that buffer does not overflow etc. I see this as the problem. Not buffer
overflows, but guesses that it would not!

> I can make a sufficiently simple type for URIs, signifying nothing,

Programming is about locally trivial things...

>> For broken design it is always too late. Fix the design.
> 
> The design as a whole is not in our hands, I should think. The design
> is as is, dictated by a combination of current input and time available.

Usual excuses...

>> How an incomplete definition is job done?
> 
> If
> - foreign company's management says "Job done!" and
> - foreign company works profitably,
> = then an incomplete definition means job done.

No, it does not mean that. Business job might be done, the job of putting
down specifications is not. You could also argue that the programming job
is done because there is no man-power available, somebody stolen the
computers or a meteorite extinguished all life on the earth. It is not
done, is a commentary why it was not.

Anyway, do I understand correctly that you changed your point from lack of
AI to blame, to laziness and ill will of some evil foreigners? (:-))

>> Why should I care about description of naming schemes? I need a set of
>> types describing file name valid in some specified environment.
> 
> Whenever there is a sufficient specification of an environment, fine.
> 
> Just saying that web documents are an example of when a specification
> might be insufficient, if it exists at all.

Specification [in]sufficient for what?

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de