There are other things besides personal financial profits. Think of them as taxes to maintain Internet working and flexible.
If you don't pay that tax, you're personally contributing to a future when simple documents become full-fledged programs, and everyone lose abilities to easily manipulate and interact with them in any but author-defined ways.
There are cases where you can be exempt from that tax - if your site is not about documents, but their transformations, i.e. it's more of a process, not data. (Then you should call it app, not site). But vast majority of sites isn't.
I never understand the condescension towards swearing.
I accept it as a thing because the States can get so puritanical, but not swearing - other than in the presence of children - strikes me as one of those self-perpetuating norms that serve no real purpose other than proving you can conform to arbitrary norms. Similar to any other way of judging you on appearance like haircut, piercings, tattoos or dress.
Sure there is value in being able to navigate those and get the advantages they confer, but why actually care about it? Or am I being obtuse and you're just playing along and perpetuating them for their own sake?
For me, it's about deferring to the parent rather than having any actual objection to it. It's their job to decide how their child is introduced into the world. Including how swearing gets contextualized for them. It's a caveat to what I said only as far as its a courtesy to avoid going down the path of telling parents how to raise their kids (or putting their kids into an environment they'd object to). I'm not interested in stepping on that rat's nest, and I wouldn't be rushing to put my pre-teen in a cussy environment either. (The "for the children" censorship/restrictions is a different tangent I have things to say about too, but was trying to sidestep that because it diluted from the point in my previous post.)
Your homebrew framework is going to have to go through all the same growing pains as any other, but you won't have anyone to lean on when the going gets tough.
If it's an open-source framework you're using, you can always fork and fix or monkeypatch if you've got problems. Most of the time your issue will be patched already in a pull-request, it's just a case of applying it. Rarely do you have a situation so unique that nobody else has experienced it.
Except, of course, when you're using your own framework.
I've seen so many projects flame out in a spectacular way when developers get it in their head that they can write their own framework, or that they don't need a framework at all. That's the first step towards unmitigated disaster. The next step is to fall into a hole that you can't get out of without a whole lot of work, and have to solve a problem that those frameworks you should've used in the first place have already addressed.
Don't forget that code you understand today quickly turns into code you don't understand in the future. Don't think just because you wrote it you're automatically golden when it comes to making fixes.
And that is the fundamental mistargeting of most framework marketing. The ideal short demo or short tutorial for a framework is probably a noob-friendly simple "CRUD plus a little bit". On the other hand that is a horrible actual application for a framework, all that complexity for little reward. And its such a noob magnet. Never programmed in ruby before? No problemo, "rails new crud-demo" and good luck.
I'll agree you need a framework to do something complicated. Not everything is complicated, or grows to become complicated.
This may be the hidden meaning of the original article from 2005. Superficially the joke is frameworks are hyper abstracted into factories for factories for factories (well maybe yes, maybe no). But the more fundamental interpretation of the story is I don't want to enter mass production, I want a fast simple reliable one-off. It will never be the next twitter and it will never be used by more than 1000 people. And sometimes, that's OK.
It's a fine line and slippery slope to be sure. I think that after programming for many years though, a seasoned developer should have honed instincts as to what is probably an established pattern and what isn't. For me, the decision was made when I found I was wasting more time wrestling with the framework rather than just using it.
Not necessarily. I think I've fixed my lion's share of other people's code that I have embedded in my own systems. In fact, I've never been up on a Saturday night due to my own bugs. In the afternoon when I'm trying to fix my unit tests sure, but not Saturday at 1am.
In an isolated system, sure. Or extremely well defined fully enforced demarcation points in a large system, sure. However as part of a large business system, that can be completely out of your control.
Especially if there is a demarcation point or highly detailed definition, but multiple incompatible interpretations simultaneously exist.
If the concept of the failure mode doesn't even exist when the unit test is being written, or is in direct opposition to the stated business plan at that time so "it can't happen" then unit tests can't help.
Even worse is political issues. Yeah sure I promised in writing our demarc point is I'd send you an ASCII file but it changed at midnight to UTF-16 strings inside an XML file and you're either going to like it or work elsewhere and I can make this stick. Oh, well, when you put it that way, then I guess that's why I'm working at 1 AM. A contrived example for short simplicity, the real world is much longer and more complicated.
In fact one of Rich Hickey's very first demos of Clojure was ants.clj which uses agents to simulate the ants. While not a game but rather a simulation it includes many elements that would also be present in a game. A literate version of ants.clj may be found here: https://github.com/limist/literate-clojure-ants/blob/master/...
I'm starting to get tired of this 'we don't need no suits' talk on HN. You need a marketing strategy, regardless of how good your game is.
Publishers have the know how and capital to devise and implement such a strategy. Don't make the mistake to assume that they are just there to take a cut of your profits without putting any value on the table.
Yeah, there's a lot of talk but not many successful examples to make up for the speech. What has actually come out of Kickstarter yet? Not much. And most of the game-related projects are super late. Mmmm.
I am not sure that developers without publisher pressure is ACTUALLY a good thing. Sometimes you need constraints to do good work.
Holy crap, that's perfect. Thanks so much! You don't have a refferal link by any chance, I'd love to make sure you get something for a rec like that: i've been looking for something like this for weeks now!