wisdom VS adama-lang

If you want to output to a browser here is the guide to achieve the best possible performance according to the numbers:

https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/master/performance...

Warning: every time I post this people claim to want superior performance but then whine when they realize they have to actually write code (as opposed to letting NPM or React or jQuery do 99% of everything).

This was attempt to research the fastest possible approach to a JavaScript GUI in the browser.

https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/master/performance...

The techniques mentioned are stupid fast to the fewest milliseconds, but most JavaScript developers find this incredibly unpopular.

Measure everything and be extremely critical. Be ready to challenge common and popular held assumptions.

Here is something I wrote about extreme performance in JavaScript that is discarded by most programmers because most people that program JavaScript professionally cannot really program.

https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/master/performance...

For simple state management here is what I do: https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/master/state_manag...

Here is an application with an OS-like GUI making use of that concept: https://github.com/prettydiff/share-file-systems

The challenge is in determining who is about to become obsolete and that is not clear. For example OOP remains the most popular and requested programming paradigm even though it has gradually slid into functional obsolescence more than a decade ago[1].

Even still legacy code will remain in use and talent to maintain legacy systems will remain in demand. My university still teaches COBOL because there still exists demand for people to maintain these legacy applications even if new applications are no longer written in that language.

[1] https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/master/Object_Orie...

That depends on how many changes it requires. If its just a matter of don't do these 3 things and your code suddenly becomes more predictable its like being slapped with a magic wand. Everybody wins. All you have to do to ensure 100% of your code compiles in a JIT is be predictable. Predictable code is, on its face, always less confusing.

> The performance benefits are likely to be minimal

This makes me cry, but not a cry of joy or ecstasy. People guessing about performance is perhaps the most frequent anti-pattern in all programming. Please read this document, you can skip to the end but it may not make much sense if you do. https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/master/JavaScript_...

After talking about the biggest failures I have seen through my career in learning JavaScript I watched a YouTube video about an interview with a divorce attorney. It was interesting because the behaviors I heard expressed in that video exactly aligned with behaviors I see expressed in failures to learn after large commitments of time investment in programming. It inspired me to write this: https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/master/JavaScript_...

The most important learning for me out of this is that people are predictable and how we commit is modeled by how perceptions of rewards are attained. It also inspired me to dive deeper into self learning about behavior and economics, because people do exceptionally irrational things to avoid perceived discomfort.

> just want to know what makes a good web framework.

Personal opinion. A framework is an architecture in a box so that you, the developer, do not have to make as many decisions. Normally when developers are asking such questions they are seeking easiness: https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/master/Easiness.md

Software developers, especially DOM fearing front developers love using the word easy. It isn’t so much an infatuation but more like a fatal attraction obsession where obstruction means war on a very emotional level. Ironically, people are loathe to confront these feelings openly and thus cannot define the word easy with any kind of clear practical application.

So, I did the world a favor and wrote just such a definition: https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/master/Easiness.md...

Depends on the definition of simplicity. People say they want simple, but then really want easy. The most easy is always somebody doing the work for you. I got tired of hearing people mention easy when really they probably mean some combination of fearful and/or lazy, so I chose to define easiness:

https://github.com/prettydiff/wisdom/blob/master/Easiness.md

If developers really wanted simplicity or to be done with work faster they would just learn the primitives of their environment: DOM, functions, and events. Most of the frameworks have APIs that are huge, so clearly simplicity isn't what's wanted.

I'm just a tryhard. However, I've been coding since a child out of a weird love/obsession. Nothing super successful in the public space, but I retired at 40 to spend time building my cathedral: https://www.adama-platform.com/

my history: https://www.adama-platform.com/2024/01/28/euler.html

I'm in the camp of f = ui(state), and the reason for this is the extreme of streaming games where UI = frame buffer. I'm inventing my own framework for radically simplifying traditional Web apps via RxHTML which works great for crud apps. However, games requires more insight into state machines and what-not.

In terms of the logic, I wrote an entire platform to simplify multi-player board games which I'm evolving to tackle various businesses. https://www.adama-platform.com/

For context, I was not raised religious at all and kind of thought a bunch of it was hokum.

But then I did a heroic dose, and I went to the church of engineering where I saw the entire construction of the machines use from the transistor all the way up to the platform I'm building.

My faith is more a faith that humanity is worth it, and I've come to see "The Lord" as an appropriate metaphor for the collective conciseness of several billion people living their lives.

At core, I'm rejecting nihilism as a valid way to live, and I'm writing an essay to outline the way.

In this, I also reject cynicism, and this is because it offers nothing.

The way forward is to embrace the responsibility that comes with great knowledge and to build an organization that helps push technology forward. This is why my platform is open source ( https://www.adama-platform.com/ ), and I'm working very hard to get my handful of clients in a good place.

I'll take the bait and provide evidence on why you should write a programming language.

First, it's technically very difficult, but you will gain deeper insight into the art of the craft. So, if you are a TC chaser or career minded person, then spending half a year writing a language will help you master the coding aspect of the game. I've started many languages since I started college, and each one was instructional. (I'm now 40 and an early retiree)

Second, it's fun.

Third, it may turn into something new. If some people don't write a new programming language, then we are stuck with what we have. This advice basically admits that the status quo is good enough.

The authors saying that the language, as a project, is a lifetime appointment? Well, this reveals everything. I believe if you want to do a programming language, then you must be willing to invest at least a decade or two.

So, here, I am at forty preparing to launch a SaaS around a language that I designed ( http://www.adama-lang.org/ ). The kicker, I believe, is that a project like this requires wandering the desert alone for quite a while.

I'm preparing to launch, and I just started to load test my shiny new production cluster. Low and behold, it sucks. Fortunately, I have a tremendous number of dashboards and isolated it to how I'm interacting with RDS. I've got my work cut out for me which I'll write about.

However, I have a potentially interesting business precisely because I evolved a language which solved a niche use-case. The number of problems that I have had to solve up to this point is not for the faint of heart. Life and reality are harsh mistress.

So, maybe, yes, you can save yourself some heartache by not writing a language. Perhaps, a better way to think or phase this is "Writing a programming language is a lonely affair that will most likely end in tragedy after a long death march".

I want to make games, but even some years ago I realized it was not a great path for a multitude of reason (many of which are in this article).

My path, and what I recommend, is do something hard and important which pays the bills at a premium. I did infrastructure work, and I was lucky to have a great decade long career allowing me to "retire early".

Now, I can work on a game at my pace building the tools that I see fit. I'm focused on board games because they have a timeless quality about them. I'm developing an entire SaaS platform and programming language to make the network goo beyond easy. http://www.adama-lang.org/

As I'm getting close to some kind of launch for the SaaS, my next thing is to build up my own web based IDE with a release-often ideology such that I can build a Roblox for online 2D board games. Honestly, I'm having a blast because I'm not suffering tools which are going to fade.

I like to call such a list a "wall of shame", and I have my own over here: http://jeffrey.io/wall-of-shame.html

What has helped me over the years is that I view tech as art, and so these projects are only market failures. Your growth as a technologist is manifest, and it's important to see side projects as a form of practice.

If you can move past the failure label and see everything as successful at something, then you feel a whole lot better. A discipline that I have had for decades now is to write a postmortem on why I believe a project is a failure because that crystalizes my learning.

My history helped me excel as a principal engineer which put me towards an early retirement where I can now focus on my ultimate side project: Adama ( http://www.adama-lang.org/ ) which I am turning into a new kind of PaaS thing.

Here is the crazy thing: I already know that I'm making several mistakes as I have no customers and no one asking me for anything. This is an exceptionally lonely way to start a project as the OP and others have noted, but I'm enjoying it well enough.

I'm working on http://www.adama-lang.org/ which started as a programming language for board games, and it is turning into a reactive privacy-focused data store for Jamstack.

I hope to launch in coming month an "Early Access" edition.

While I do intend to turn this into a business, I'm primarily focusing on small projects to amuse myself. I'm going to break every rule in the business with my LLC. The #1 company value is sleep.

I actually think this is onto something that I'm finding in a different way. Instead of a massive database, what if we had a key-value store mapping keys to tiny databases.

This is, to some degree, what I'm building over at http://www.adama-lang.org/ without a full SQL engine. Each document has tables, and the tables can be indexed. I have yet to find a usecase (in my domain) which requires joins. HOWEVER, I've had a ton of fun building it and I'm getting ready to start making games.

I do believe it would be amazing to have a key-logger service where a reducer like sqlite/adama could come into collapse the log into a single file.

The closest I see is from the Boki paper ( https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~zjia/boki-sosp21.pdf ) which was presented at SOSP21.

CRDT solve a part of your problem, and an important consideration is whether or not you want off-line editing. If you don't need off-line editing, then a WebSocket can do it.

I'm actually using my project to build a collaborative IDE (designer like Figma): http://www.adama-lang.org/

I'm going to be launching it as a SaaS soon so people can spin up a new back-end without managing an infrastructure.