Distributing, clustering... complicating

I don't know a great word for it, a lot of people write "moving to" "converting to" or similar

What happened when I tried that last was both "re-designing" and "re-writing" the system 😄

Joe Armstrong wants to know your location

🙂

I think he'd call it "designing it correctly, this time"

Yeah, we ended up with a grossly simplified and generally far worse implementation of parts of OTP 🙂 And I mean simplified in the way you simplify a beautiful tree by chopping it up with a dull chainsaw to be clear

And then trying to connect the pieces using hobby glue and hope, while blindfolded and hogtied.

A marketing term often used is "at/to scale"

I felt I had to clarify my deepest respect of Joe (R.I.P) there!

I've wibbled my widget to scale to serve a bazillion customers.

As long as you go fully cloud native you'll be alright @U11EL3P9U!

(throw in blockchain, and you're golden)

Don't forget to shift left

https://github.com/clj-commons/useful/blob/master/src/flatland/useful/seq.clj#L129?

That's just a state monad :thinking_face:

Now we have monads, too!

An off-topic thread in #off-topic, that’s gotta be ok.

I think we have a bunch of monadic like things in Clojure, we just don’t put them front and center.

Which, is both good and bad. Clojure devs tend to be more concerned with effecting change than creating algebras.

The creating algebras part is pretty lame, but sometimes I wish I had some enforcement of effects

I've seen some :shit:

maybe a stretch.. scaling?

Do it right or do it twice. So you could call it "do it the second time" 😄

> I laboriously translated the idea into Algol 60 so as to make the idea more accessible to readers. How times have changed. Today it would be JavaScript!