These are chat archives for jdubray/sam

Sep 2017
Rob Siera
Sep 27 2017 07:52
@jdubray Could you elaborate on the bakery-algorithm, or better the problem you want to solve with that? You called it 'keeping the server and client model in sync'. Could you explain a bit the issue you see with keeping those in sync?
Jean-Jacques Dubray
Sep 27 2017 13:19
@robsiera the bakery algorithm can give a simple but efficient solution to deal with concurrency. This would of course be important when your model is allowed to make API calls (create, update, delete).
Jean-Jacques Dubray
Sep 27 2017 14:00
Why do we need frameworks? looking at the history of OOP, it's pretty clear that when you start on the wrong foundation, when you need to build "big" things, you need a framework to keep the whole thing from collapsing.
Rob Siera
Sep 27 2017 14:22
Thx @jdubray . Searching through the history of this room I found other relevant information.
Eric Skogen
Sep 27 2017 19:10
I came here to post that haha
Good bit about Lamport's work and TLA+ in there
Jean-Jacques Dubray
Sep 27 2017 19:15
I cannot emphasize enough that programming language have huge bias towards the "physical view" (actions and types) and the role of the programmers it to weave them in a conceptual structure (states and relations). That's why code is so hard to write, reason about and communicate.
It's not until we will achieve a (commonly agreed) balance between State, Type, Action and Relation that we will make progress.
Fred Daoud
Sep 27 2017 22:46
But TLA+ occupies just a small, far corner of the mainstream, if it can be said to take up any space there at all. Even to a seasoned engineer like Newcombe, the language read at first as bizarre and esoteric—a zoo of symbols. For Lamport, this is a failure of education. Though programming was born in mathematics, it has since largely been divorced from it. Most programmers aren’t very fluent in the kind of math—logic and set theory, mostly—that you need to work with TLA+. “Very few programmers—and including very few teachers of programming—understand the very basic concepts and how they’re applied in practice. And they seem to think that all they need is code,” Lamport says. “The idea that there’s some higher level than the code in which you need to be able to think precisely, and that mathematics actually allows you to think precisely about it, is just completely foreign. Because they never learned it.”