1/ A brief rant: There are way too many people in computational social science (or computational X) who incessantly cite the literature on software engineering as defense of their god awful fucking code.
-
Show this thread
-
2/ That's not to knock software engineering as a field. It's extremely useful to identify and understand patterns so that you can understand the design of software better! But, it makes very little sense when reporting on the implementation of an ABM.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
3/ In fact, (imo), doing so reliably signals an artifact-riddled ABM. It's formalism as a diversion from code that smells.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
4/ ...and, it's usually written by someone who *didn't* do most of the coding -- the person I'm least interested in hearing from when the concern is: "how does this model work?"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
💥 (wannabe) Ƀreaker of (the Bad) Loops 💫 Retweeted 💥 (wannabe) Ƀreaker of (the Bad) Loops 💫
💥 (wannabe) Ƀreaker of (the Bad) Loops 💫 added,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
PPS: If you're starting out in a computational field and think you're a weak programmer, skip the GangOfFour-style books and *use* things like
@PragmaticAndy &@pragdave's The Pragmatic Programmer. - Pick a rule; - Use it while writing code; - Repeat.https://www.amazon.com/Pragmatic-Programmer-Journeyman-Master/dp/020161622X …2 replies 5 retweets 17 likesShow this thread -
I enjoyed that book greatly. I bought it right before starting full time as a software engineer, read it and it's been a source of inspiration on my desk ever since so I can loan it out to other people.
1 reply 2 retweets 2 likes
Me too!
-
-
Hey thanks! Always appreciate hearing that we’ve helped.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.