It's really about collaboration. The answer to the problem "too many
modules" isn't Write Less Modules, it's Collaborate More!

the ability to collaborate is a soft human skill, but a skill that you can
develop.

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Rick Waldron <[email protected]>wrote:

>
> On Friday, October 12, 2012 at 6:15 AM, Dominic Tarr wrote:
>
> I was worried for a second that this post was gonna be about punctuation.
>
> Pleasantly Surprised!
>
> The hardest part is the bit about NIH. This isn't really something we
> understand properly yet. It can be a struggle just to find other modules
> that do the think you want. Sometimes you've written a module before you
> even discover that other solutions exist.
>
> If you do find someone has a module that is close to what you need,
> but not quite, in some important way, then you need to communicate with
> them. The best way to do this is on IRC. Unfortunately not everyone uses
> IRC.
>
> Please use IRC.
>
>
> +9001
>
>
> Code is a personal thing, and it's important to try and understand the
> VIBE the author is going for. Issues aren't really a way to communicate
> vibe.
>
> If someone is posting issues, or telling you about stuff in irc, please
> listen to them. Even if they are annoying. They will probably improve the
> usability of your module quite a bit.
>
> To really understand this though, I think we need anthropologists to live
> with hackers, and write a whole book about it.
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Tim Oxley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Yep, the idea of best practices is "do this unless you have a good reason
> not to", which doesn't mean it's a blanket rule that must never be broken.
> A guideline, not a rule.
>
> The main issue with inconsistent sync/async functions is the behaviour has
> low discoverability unless it's documented (unlikely), you read the
> source, or you get gotcha'd by it.
>
> -Tim
>
>
> On Friday, 12 October 2012 08:46:52 UTC+10, Jimb Esser wrote:
>
> Though process.nextTick() *itself* is fast, delaying calling the callback
> until it gets through that queue can have large performance implications,
> for example, in our case, we may have a tick of our physics simulation
> queued up (which could take hundreds of ms), and if some logic has to go
> through a few process.nextTicks, all interspersed with some other expensive
> operations in between, this kind of API can lend itself to some poorly
> performing side effects.
>
> That being said, I do agree that it's generally "best practice" to do
> this, but it's good to be aware that it's not always the best for
> performance (in some of our own APIs, where we set them up to always call
> the callbacks asynchronously, we have needed to add short-cuts in a couple
> of cases where it had a significant impact on latency).
>
> On Thursday, October 11, 2012 1:36:58 PM UTC-7, Adam Crabtree wrote:
>
> It's a best practice because it helps those unfamiliar with the reasoning
> to keep from shooting themselves or their users in the foot. There are
> several ways that this may affect you, but a quick summary can be found
> here:
>
> http://howtonode.org/**understanding-process-next-**tick<http://howtonode.org/understanding-process-next-tick>
>
> How slow is process.nextTick? A quick benchmark reveals it's not just
> <1ms, but in fact is roughly 1µs (0.001ms for the lazy):
>
> var i = 0, sum = 0
> ;(function foo() {
>   var t = process.hrtime()
>   process.nextTick(function() {
>     sum += process.hrtime(t)[1]
>     if(++i<10000000) return foo()
>     console.log('Average time: ', sum/i)
>   })
> })()
>
> That being said, there are always exceptions to the rule, and if you
> understand the tradeoffs and have a need to shave off µs, then go for it.
> Chances are though, for the other 99.9% it's a micro-optimization (no pun
> intended ;P). Again, this requires a special set of circumstances to be an
> issue, but when it is, discovering that the cause was a cache hit and a
> synchronous call to callback can be frustrating.
>
> Cheers,
> Adam Crabtree
>
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Axel Kittenberger <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > I'd rather see client patterns that are immune to  callbacks being
> called before the function returns sometimes.
>
> Ditto!
>
> We should encourage people to write callers that are good, rather than
> libraries that deliberately waste performance and tell the callers
> "its alright you wrote bad code, they have to put in a
> process.nextTick anyway". And < 1ms can be a lot in some areas.
>
> Document your function accordingly, if it guarantees a particular
> callback/return order or not. In many situations, standard is,
> callback immediately if you have all what is needed for the callback.
> If the caller fucks up, that one should be fixed, instead of the
> callee.
>
> Or in other words, cure the problem, not the symptom.
>
> --
> Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/
> Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/**node/wiki/Mailing-List-**
> Posting-Guidelines<https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "nodejs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/**group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en<http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Better a little with righteousness
>        than much gain with injustice.
> Proverbs 16:8
>
>  --
> Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/
> Posting guidelines:
> https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "nodejs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
>
>
>  --
> Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/
> Posting guidelines:
> https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "nodejs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
>
>
>  --
> Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/
> Posting guidelines:
> https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "nodejs" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
>

-- 
Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/
Posting guidelines: 
https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "nodejs" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en

Reply via email to