• 0 Posts
  • 31 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle











  • silasmariner@programming.devtoScience Memes@mander.xyzGolden
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    There are so many different areas of computer science though… Everything from pure mathematics (e.g ‘we found a new algorithm that does X in O(logx)’) to the absurdly specific (‘when I run the load tests with this configuration it’s faster’). The former would get published. The latter wouldn’t. And the stuff in the middle ranges the gamut from ‘here’s my new GC algorithm that performs better in benchmarks on these sample sets’ to ‘looks like programmers have fewer bugs when you constrain them with these invariants’. All the way over on the other side, NFT/Blockchain/AI announcement crap usually doesn’t even have a scientific statement to be expressed, so there’s nothing to confirm or deny. There are issues with some areas, but I’m not sure that replication is really the big one for most of these. Only one it commonly applies to IMO are productivity or bug-frequency claims which are generally hella suss


  • I know you’re playing the straight man to a joke, but actually you can apply a linter, then tell GitHub to ignore the implied ownership history for the purposes of blame from that reclining pr. All such prs are massive and yet by virtue of the replayability of the linter it’s also very easy to ensure errors didn’t slip in when reviewing.

    I know the original comment was about renaming all the variables, but that’s obviously deliberately absurd, so I’m using here a completely realistic example instead.