TIL what Catamorphism and Anamorphism, and about a new useful function. Functional programmers are not shy to use mathematical terms that could frighten the casual programmer listening. Functor, monoid, applicative just to name the first that comes to mind. Usually, they turn out to be relatively simple concepts (which get combined together until they are no longer simple).
Continue reading “Unfrightening Catamorphism and Anamorphism”
Jung’s Synchronicity theory is as fascinating as unscientific. It is “unscientific” because it can’t be proven false by its very own definition – two events appear to be related even if the causal relation is missing. Someone talks about dreaming of a Golden Scarab and suddenly a Golden Scarab hits your window. There is no apparent causal relationship, yet the event pair is so unlikely that the Synchronicity idea has been developed around this. My rational mind is more inclined in thinking of this as a selection bias (countless times it happens something like – you spend a few days away in a city and suddenly the news is filled with stories about this city). Nonetheless, when it happens I always feel uneasy, like the Universe would like to have a word with me.
So when I read the tweet below, by Mario Fusco, in a quite specific job timeframe, I felt called out
In my whole professional career, I always tried to push the boundaries of the language(s) I was using, from assembly to C++, to achieve better engineering, more robust and safer code, fewer bug opportunities, simpler development, and improved collaboration. This meant sometimes introducing the latest C++ standard, sometimes introducing concepts from other languages and sometimes defining DSL with the help of the preprocessor. So I am not new to some raise of eyebrows when people look at my code.
Continue reading “Unidiomatic Solutions and Technical Debt”