Singapore Slung

After a long, brutal day of travel, I've made it to Singapore for the SDA.NET Conference, where I'm delivering 3 talks on .NET development on behalf of ThoughtWorks. Total travel time from Atlanta, from the door of my condo to the door of the Pan Pacific Hotel in Singapore: 28 1/2 hours, 20 of that in the air. I saw 4 movies and slept through 2 more on the various flights. But, I'm here! And I have a nice view of the convention center from my hotel window. I hope to enjoy my first trip here to this beautiful, clean city. More details later!

XML Hell

If you programmed in or used Windows, you are all too familiar with "DLL Hell", where DLL's get over-written by newer (or older) incompatible versions. Writing applications as piles of DLL's made sense when resources (particularly disk drives) were expensive, but not so much any more. However, this blog entry isn't about DLL Hell. It's about a related phenomena in the Java world - XML Hell.

One of the saving graces when Java first arrived was the freedom once and for all from DLL Hell. Of course, DLL Hell was really just the creeping scourge of versioning, and it came to Java with a vengeance in the form of XML Hell. I've been fighting with this little problem for the last few days. XML parsers and XSLT engines are supposed to be backwards compatible...the operational words there are "supposed to be". I'm working on a project where everything works great under JDK 1.4.x but causes blue smoke whenever you try to build it under Java 5. Turns out the problem is the version of the XSLT processor that comes with Java 5. One of the vendors of a 3rd party library in the application relies on specific behavior in an older XSLT processor that accidentally takes advantage of a bug in the older processor. The bug is fixed in Java 5, and causes everything to blow up at build time. Sigh....

The only platform that has gotten this right is .NET when using Strong Names (which can be a little cumbersome, but the fundamental solution is a good one). That's one area that .NET has definitely leap-frogged Java: versioning libraries. I hope that Java someday addresses this problem.

Management Mind Tricks, Volume 1

Over my career course as a consultant-type person, I've developed some patterns for dealing with irrational pointy-haired boss types and the technical sycophants that sometimes accompany them, and I've passed these on to friends for their own use. One has recently been used successfully and so I thought I'd document it here. Fortunately, the friend who used it also gave it the memorable name that patterns are supposed to have: "The 'Let Them Say Any Crazy Shit They Want' Mind Trick Pattern".

Here's how it works. If you disagree with someone on a technical point, and you know you are right and they are wrong (either from misunderstanding the problem, politics, underwear too tight, whatever), let them make whatever claims they want about their solution. The executor of the pattern calmly reminds them that his way is better for these calmly stated reasons. Let the arguer point to a phantom requirement, or phantom performance problem, or any other specious claim, and the executor remains calm and points out why his way is better. Repeat this pattern until everyone is saying that the executor's way is better. It takes quiet confidence, zen-like calm, and unshakable conviction, but it works. The recent application of this pattern by my friend (in conjunction with another pattern not of my devising) took 8 man-days but, in the end, they are doing it the right way.

This pattern only works if you are technically unassailable, and you have to concede if the arguer ever does make a salient point. However, the zen-like calm in which it is delivered still keeps lingering resentment over disagreements to a minimum. To be used sparingly in situations where nothing else seems to work and you are being asked to do something stupid for no good reason.

Hedonic Adaptation

Have you ever noticed that you are just one more gadget away from pure technology bliss? If only I could get the newest back-lit, bluetooth, high resolution, 64 Mb turnip twaddler, I wouldn't ever need another gadget. But a funny thing happens a week after you get back from the electronics store...now, you need something else. I had recognized this pattern in myself, but recently discovered that, not only am I not the only one, but psychologists have named this: hedonic adaptation. This comes from studies of happiness. For example, lottery winners, right after they win, report that they are very happy. However, they quickly adapt, and, after a while, their sense of happiness and well being returns to their pre-winning levels. The same is true for technological innovations. No matter how dramatically a bit of technology improves our lives, we quickly take it for granted and start looking for the next thing. This helps explain why people in 2000 were not measurably happier than those in 1900, even though technology has made our lives astoundingly easier.

For more information about this, check out this fascinating article Technology and Happiness in Technology Review. And, as much as it seems like it, that new Powerbook with Tiger on it won't make you blissfully happy...Well, maybe just a little. I'm willing to try.

Test-first Mine Sweeper

I don't play many games on computers (too much other stuff to do). So, some of you will be shocked and mortified that I only recently discovered that, in Minesweeper, if you both-button click on a number, it will either highlight the un-clicked cells adjacent to it or go ahead and uncover cells that you would know are already mine-free. It's harder to explain than to do it. Some of you can't believe that anyone that has been using Windows for better than 10 years is just now finding this out, and the others can't figure out what I'm talking about. For those who don't know, dash over and try it...I'll wait.

Back? OK, here's the thing. When I do test-first development, I write the test and go ahead and run it, knowing full well that it will fail. It's sort of a Zen thing, I guess. I know that it takes a little more time, but it's part of the satisfaction of seeing it fail then succeed shortly afterwards. Even this isn't so unusual.

I've found that I do the same thing when I play (what is to me) the New and Improved Minesweeper -- I do test-first clicking. Even if I know that there is only one possible uncovered cell nearby that this number can reach, I still double-button click on it to satisfy myself that it is the only one. It's test-first Mine Sweeper.

I really should get out more.