←back to thread

Be Aware of the Makefile Effect

(blog.yossarian.net)
431 points thunderbong | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.013s | source
Show context
mianos ◴[] No.42664066[source]
I have an alternate theory: about 10% of developers can actually start something from scratch because they truly understand how things work (not that they always do it, but they could if needed). Another 40% can get the daily job done by copying and pasting code from local sources, Stack Overflow, GitHub, or an LLM—while kinda knowing what’s going on. That leaves 50% who don’t really know much beyond a few LeetCode puzzles and have no real grasp of what they’re copying and pasting.

Given that distribution, I’d guess that well over 50% of Makefiles are just random chunks of copied and pasted code that kinda work. If they’re lifted from something that already works, job done—next ticket.

I’m not blaming the tools themselves. Makefiles are well-known and not too verbose for smaller projects. They can be a bad choice for a 10,000-file monster—though I’ve seen some cleanly written Makefiles even for huge projects. Personally, it wouldn’t be my first choice. That said, I like Makefiles and have been using them on and off for at least 30 years.

replies(7): >>42664103 #>>42664461 #>>42664526 #>>42664536 #>>42664757 #>>42672850 #>>42676540 #
huijzer ◴[] No.42664461[source]
> That leaves 50% who don’t really know much beyond a few LeetCode puzzles and have no real grasp of what they’re copying and pasting.

Small nuance: I think people often don’t know because they don’t have the time to figure it out. There are only so many battles you can fight during a day. For example if I’m a C++ programmer working on a ticket, how many layers of the stack should I know? For example, should I know how the CPU registers are called? And what should an AI researcher working always in Jupyter know? I completely encourage anyone to learn as much about the tools and stack as possible, but there is only so much time.

replies(6): >>42664760 #>>42664847 #>>42665008 #>>42665319 #>>42666573 #>>42670611 #
silver_silver ◴[] No.42664760[source]
We can’t really call the field engineering if this is the standard. A fundamental understanding of what one’s code actually makes the machine do is necessary to write quality code regardless of how high up the abstraction stack it is
replies(3): >>42664887 #>>42665077 #>>42681706 #
kragen ◴[] No.42665077[source]
Steam engines predate the understanding of not just the crystalline structure of steel but even the basics of thermodynamics by quite a few decades.
replies(2): >>42665397 #>>42668316 #
silver_silver ◴[] No.42665397[source]
Yes and they’re far less efficient and require far more maintenance than an equivalent electric or even diesel engine, where equivalent power is even possible
replies(2): >>42665482 #>>42667136 #
BlueTemplar ◴[] No.42665482[source]
Why do you assume that the same doesn't apply to electric and diesel engines ?
replies(1): >>42671235 #
1. jmb99 ◴[] No.42671235[source]
We don’t have to assume, because we know. We can calculate and measure the efficiency of gasoline and diesel engines, and electric motors. We know that electric motors are highly efficient, and ICE engines are not.
replies(1): >>42672614 #
2. BlueTemplar ◴[] No.42672614[source]
We're not talking about efficiency, we are talking about engineering developing before science.