StealthyCoder

We all know the saying it is that you know what to do with it. Well it seems in development world the size is not the bigger the better but everything has to be as tiny as possible; from silicon chips to frameworks. Also they have no idea how to use it and what to do with it.

To add to previous post where I talk about using Unix timestamps for all things related to when I want to give the following addendum.

This post is in response to many claims of other posts stating that storing a UTC date is not enough in all situations. The most recent one that triggered me being this one. They all claim that you lose information about when something happened. I will refer to Unix timestamps when saying timestamps from now on.

So I read this article which is a response to this article recently. The reaction article is what triggered me to write this post.

Today I found myself in a discussion about why the state of the project was in the state it was. The voices of concern were that we were just working blindly without there being a refined user story and ticket to keep track of. No usage of Pythonic standards were followed. No linting, no tests and no clear structure in the code. In short all the things we as developers have said time and again we should not accept in a project yet we did it again anyway.

I recently read an article about Sacrificial Architecture and it got me thinking on software design and longevity. In the article it actually alludes to something I thought of when thinking of what Sacrificial Architecture would mean.

This is a short post about a phenomenon I have seen already in the past years. Every time we build a project the developer makes everything work locally in whatever way is known to him. So either using a service or own docker images or installing the actual software on the host system.

I recently had a small discussion on why it is a bad thing when we can not automate, or script, something. The only argument this person had was if we spend two weeks on automating something that takes 5 minutes that is a bad thing. There are several reasons to automate procedures and saving time is not the main thing.

So for the smart people out there they might have already figured out that the result for 153 is the same as for 135,315,351,513 and 531. This means that we can calculate the result for all of those once and just check if the result of that calculation is in that list. Which is the case for the number 153.

The next mini optimization we can do is to bail out earlier because when summing the number and we overshoot the original then we can stop immediately. For example 9 ** 6 is a big number and so with bigger numbers it makes sense to bail out earlier.