Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | mattmanser's comments login

I've been doing this a while now, and as far as I can tell, there's always a way to run two frameworks side by side and migrate. And existing users get new stuff right away.

I've done it backend, I've done it frontend. With web apps it's always possible, it's the fundamental nature of the web and browsers.

Frontend is trivial because of how browsers work, every page could run a different framework if you were that mad.

Backend I've had two frameworks on one server for multiple migration projects. There's usually a way unless you're switching language.

But worst case scenario, say you wanted to change everything, I'd stick a load balancer in front. Route according to the end point requested. Then gradually migrate end points. You might need some craziness around authentication, but that's the sort of issue that is solvable with a week's work by a single, good, developer.

What was so complicated that stopped you doing that? Genuinely interested.


That is actually part of the "extra support" we decided to pay for.

The application was originally written in Vaadin 7, Vaadin 8 had an absolute ton of breaking changes and we could not migrate in time, and then the breaking changes continued to compound as new releases happened and they migrated away from GWT, making a "big bang" rewrite not practical.

Their extended support included a tool called multi-platform runtime, which allowed the old application and new application to be run side-by-side and each section replaced one at a time. So that is essentially what we did. Still took 3+ years to do the rewrite.


There actually is a right way and wrong way to tie your shoes.

Even with the bunny ear method right bunny ear over left is wrong, it comes undone much easier than left bunny ear over right.

If you're like me there's a Google rabbit hole to disappear into for 1/2 hour, completely forget about, and carry on doing it completely wrong.


Just want to add to what other people are saying, not only did VB6 support relative positioning, but the history of responsive sizing in applications wasn't because of mobiles.

It was when monitors started changing sizes. Everyone used to have 800 x 600. Then the market exploded.

And different monitor resolutions appeared and became divergent way before the iPhone came out.

There was a period in desktop applications where some apps were absolutely positioned and didn't support anything apart from the 800 x 600 layout. You'd get this huge gutter on the right and bottom of the application window.

It was fairly brief, as changing forms from absolute positioning to relative positioning in VB6 was pretty easy.


> Just want to add to what other people are saying, not only did VB6 support relative positioning

Did it? I know .NET WinForms does with Control.Anchor, but that is VB.NET, not VB6.

It’s been many years but I don’t recall any method for that in VB6. As someone else noted you could handle the resize handler and move things around yourself.


It does spectacular job with well trodden paths. Asked it to give me a map react control with points plotted and got something working in a jiffy.

I was trying to get it write robot framework code earlier and it was remarkably terrible. I would point out an obvious problem, it would replace the code with something even more spectacularly wrong.

When I pointed out the new error, it just gave me the exact same old code.

This happened again and again.

It was almost entirely useless.

Really showed how the sausage is made, this generation of AI is just regurgitation of patterns it stole from other people.


In my experience 4o is really good at ignoring user-provided corrections and insanely regurgitating the same code (and/or the same problems) over and over again.

ChatGPT 4 does much better with corrections, as does Claude. 4o is a pox.


That 4o is often times worse that GPT 4 has been widely ignored. :/

In the UK they heavily discourage even the £50 note (roughly €60/$63). We basically only use 5/10/20.

Most shops won't take them and cash machines don't give them out.

Which is pretty odd now given how high inflation got here for the last few years.

Here's an article from 5 years ago saying that £50 notes were widely regarded as just used by criminals.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48993008


The same attitude is present in the US. You can occasionally find signs in stores in the US indicating they won't accept bills larger than $20: https://www.amazon.com/SmartSign-V-shaped-Businesses-Restaur...

The real root of the attitude should be "We don't accept transactions that would produce more than 20 USD in change." However the average person is an idiot so it's easier for them to just say they don't take 50s/100s. I guess arguably there's a greater incentive to try to use lesser bills to make larger ones, but that's what the watermarks and security strips are supposed to prevent.

Citibank ATMs will happily give you $100 bills if you don't specify otherwise. I prefer $20s, as less inconvenient for the store clerks.

It's always a lie though. You can't realistically start a register out with less than $100 of change for a few hour shift. Maybe $50 for really short shift or if there's a manager with safe access who can reload it.

The signs aren't about the amount of change in the register. It's that they'll refuse to take large bills.

Yes I found this strange coming from Ireland where (during the Celtic Tiger at least!) the minimum I ever seemed to get from cash machines was 50 euros.

Nah, in the UK it's now fairly uncommon to still have a hot water tank. Most houses have mixer taps, and new fittings for bathrooms or kitchens will have mixer taps unless the home owner is masochist.

The separate taps thing is more because it costs to replace a sink. So even if you put a new boiler in an old houses lots of people aren't going to replace the fittings in the kitchens and bathrooms at the same time.


I never get this sort of rhetoric.

Its literally 50/50 split.

50% of Americans DON'T want this.

Ita a quirk of democracy, but talking about 'Americans' wanting this, when the result is entirely a coin toss.

And one weighted towards repiblicans by the way their state system works, giving the smaller states a dispropotinate say.

Same thing happens in the UK. A fairly small percentage of the UK voted for Labour and yet it was 'a landslide'. More people voted for Jeremey Corbyn than Kier starmer, but one is apparently 'out of touch' and the less popular politician is somehow a 'genius'.

It's such a bizarre rhetoric that has no basis in reality, just electoral technicalities.


its more than half so far... not quite as close a split as I would have expected 66,181,515 votes (47.5%) 71,113,511 votes (51%)

But yeah.. roughly half the country doesnt want him


You don't think the democratic state Governors will step up if there's even a hint of that happening?

In the end a lot of the money and power is mostly in blue states.


Governors can be killed by executive order. It’s an official action so under the new Supreme Court ruling the President can’t be prosecuted. Anyone who carries out the order can be pardoned. The courts can of course reverse the executive order, but not resurrect a man so the case would be moot.

This is a man who has talked about shooting political opponents on the campaign trail, I’d be astonished if he doesn’t follow through if there will be no consequences.


Governors can be killed by executive order

This is a bald faced lie. Stop talking rubbish.


Can you explain why? It seems like that is exactly what was implied by the recent SC judgement.


The sequence of event presented by the poster you are responding to is indeed a joke in 2024. Can you however not see a future where it becomes a practical possibility?


When the liberals on the Supreme Court say this:

> Looking beyond the fate of this particular prosecution, the long-term consequences of today’s decision are stark. The Court effectively creates a law-free zone around the President, upsetting the status quo that has existed since the Founding. This new official-acts immunity now “lies about like a loaded weapon” for any President that wishes to place his own interests, his own political survival, or his own financial gain, above the interests of the Nation. Kore­matsu v. United States, 323 U. S. 214, 246 (1944) (Jackson, J., dissenting). The President of the United States is the most powerful person in the country, and possibly the world. When he uses his official powers in any way, under the majority’s reasoning, he now will be insulated from criminal prosecution. Orders the Navy’s Seal Team 6 to as­sassinate a political rival? Immune. Organizes a military coup to hold onto power? Immune. Takes a bribe in ex­change for a pardon? Immune. Immune, immune, immune.

Then the claim that the President can in their official capacity assassinate others with impunity and protection from prosecution is no lie.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf

You're living in a pre-Trump world. The Supreme Court changed the rules while you were asleep.


I think you'll see a huge clawing back of power to the Federal government. Just around the things where they want to stick it to blue states.


Definitely. This will involve a tariff regime explicitly disadvantaging the ports in coastal blue states. Certain bureaucratic centers will be moved, the kinds of things a real estate developer can follow in a short meeting.

The side effects of this will both hurt his base, and offer opportunities for smart people. For example, careless tariffs can raise the cost of everything at Walmart by 60% with Amazon not far behind. You know this and I know this.

Tariffs also demonstrate to domestic companies that they don’t need to innovate. The material and labor to innovate will be cheaper overseas. You know this and I know this.


That money and power doesn’t seem to be willing to move towards centrists policies. And there is a lot of power in the president, considering how unstable the world is the most likely scenario now is further consolidation of that power. And Russia or Israel are good examples, if anyone wants to see what happens after the power gets consolidated.


It's the same with all crimes, sure you can theoretically get away with the perfect crime. But you only have to make one mistake to get caught.

Re-use a username, accidentally log in to something as yourself, forget to turn on the VPN, etc.

Just for some lolz which could result in prison time.


You just deal with it. Manually if need be, sending someone a spreadsheet. Not that hard, just a right pita.

Tbh the article's actual example is stupid, if I desperately need to rollback that change I'd just take a backup of that table and change the new types back to the main payment method, 'Stripe'. When we've got it fixed and redeploy the changes, change them back.

Problem solved in two SQL queries.

Not sure if the author's never had to deal with a problem like this before, but his 'impossible' problem's got a bloody obvious solution.

   SELECT * INTO _paymentsbackup FROM payments WHERE PaymentType in (3, 4)

   UPDATE payments SET PayemntType = 1 WHERE PaymentType in (3, 4)


Lol. Your solution is to change a bunch of recorded money transactions? Oh shoot I messed up. Let me just change all these cash transactions temporarily to stripe. Oh shoot I also messed up my sales tax for these geographic regions. Let me just change all the dollar amounts temporarily. That’s hilarious.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: