| GOCMD=go | |
| GOTEST=$(GOCMD) test | |
| GOVET=$(GOCMD) vet | |
| BINARY_NAME=example | |
| VERSION?=0.0.0 | |
| SERVICE_PORT?=3000 | |
| DOCKER_REGISTRY?= #if set it should finished by / | |
| EXPORT_RESULT?=false # for CI please set EXPORT_RESULT to true | |
| GREEN := $(shell tput -Txterm setaf 2) |
class: center middle
Currying is the process by which a function of N arguments is implemented as N single-argument functions such that first of them takes in the first argument and returns a function which takes in the 2nd argument and so on, until the Nth single-argument function finally returns the value of the multi-argument function being implemented.
System Design questions tests the candidate ability to be able to create a system based on a user prompt. A user prompt is either a client telling you what they want or a team making an assumption of what a potential user might want in an idea. What makes this different from an OOP Design question is that this focuses less on the application components themselves and more of the flow of data and how we scale that data based on our understanding of the various trade offs as we modify our system. For the purposes of the REACTO, we will focus mostly on schema design and API design for the main chunk. We can leave a small discussion at the end for scalability but that will be discussed mostly on Friday for our think, pair, share exercise.
User prompt: I want to be able to book movie theater seats online.
I was recently asked to explain why I felt disappointed by Haskell, as a language. And, well. Crucified for crucified, I might as well criticise Haskell publicly.
First though, I need to make it explicit that I claim no particular skill with the language - I will in fact vehemently (and convincingly!) argue that I'm a terrible Haskell programmer. And what I'm about to explain is not meant as The Truth, but my current understanding, potentially flawed, incomplete, or flat out incorrect. I welcome any attempt at proving me wrong, because when I dislike something that so many clever people worship, it's usually because I missed an important detail.
Another important point is that this is not meant to convey the idea that Haskell is a bad language. I do feel, however, that the vocal, and sometimes aggressive, reverence in which it's held might lead people to have unreasonable expectations. It certainly was my case, and the reason I'm writing this.
I love the concept of type class
| // A simple counter example | |
| // The setup will be more complicated in modern apps built using React | |
| const incrementNode = document.getElementById('increment'); | |
| const decrementNode = document.getElementById('decrement'); | |
| const inputNode = document.getElementById('counter'); | |
| const counter = { | |
| initialize() { | |
| incrementNode.addEventListener('click', (event) => { |
| // https://web.archive.org/web/20141119215047/http://jsperf.com/javascript-quicksort-comparisons | |
| // based on work from Vladimir Yaroslavskiy: https://web.archive.org/web/20151002230717/http://iaroslavski.narod.ru/quicksort/DualPivotQuicksort.pdf | |
| var dualPivotQuicksort = (function (Math, toString, undefined) { | |
| 'use strict'; | |
| function swap(arr, i, j) { | |
| var temp = arr[i]; | |
| arr[i] = arr[j]; | |
| arr[j] = temp; | |
| } | |
| function dualPivotQuicksort(arr, comp, left, right, div) { |
Douglas Crockford, author of JavaScript: The Good parts, recently gave a talk called The Better Parts, where he demonstrates how he creates objects in JavaScript nowadays. He doesn't call his approach anything, but I will refer to it as Crockford Classless.
Crockford Classless is completely free of class, new, this, prototype and even Crockfords own invention Object.create.
I think it's really, really sleek, and this is what it looks like:
function dog(spec) {