“How” ages faster than “why”

Re:“How” ages faster than “why” by zitterbewegung on Friday January 27, 2017 @12:17PM (#13501052)

I agree that how ages faster than why but I would like to add that how ages slower than people think how ages.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“How” ages faster than “why” by stephengillie on Friday January 27, 2017 @12:19PM (#13501069)

Could you be more specific?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“How” ages faster than “why” by TazeTSchnitzel on Friday January 27, 2017 @12:51PM (#13501305)

I'm not the person you're replying to, but: technology stacks live for a long time. What's hot changes, but what was hot yesterday and the day before will still be in use for many projects, including new ones, for a long time. And equally, it takes a long time for something to become greatly popular.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“How” ages faster than “why” by acqq on Friday January 27, 2017 @04:44PM (#13502961)

You're exactly right. One simple example:

Numpy for Python, Building from source:

https://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy-1.10.0/user/install.html

"Various NumPy modules use FORTRAN 77 libraries, so you’ll also need a FORTRAN 77 compiler installed."

It also nicely demonstrates how with the new levels of abstractions we preserve the "hows" but hide them from a lot of the users.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“How” ages faster than “why” by zip1234 on Friday January 27, 2017 @12:49PM (#13501290)

I think he may be referring to the fact that the Angular 1 code referred to in the article will likely be maintained for quite awhile.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:“How” ages faster than “why” by zitterbewegung on Friday January 27, 2017 @02:15PM (#13501847)

For example people think that everyone will or should upgrade / use Angular 1 and use Angular 4 .

[ Parent | on HN ]