SimulaE - Model Update

I've made mention of my virtual world simulation project on multiple blog entries, most recently related to Ruby and making a rewrite of the existing engine in said language to test out its applicability (the language not the simulation), which by the way I found to be the lesser language for this kind of application, but I'm not saying anything about the language as a whole.  Either way, onto SimulaE, which after all is what this post is about today.

I have been rattling my brains (and occasionally those of my friends) regarding the basic SimulaE Object model, which up to this point has served its purpose.  Though the time has come for it to evolve.  It can implemented in a simpler manner and I have known this in my mind all along though it hasn't been an issue in the process of designing the parser which has for the most part been satisfactorily completed. Now that my focus has returned to the object model, I feel it a fine time to share that update thus far.  Comments are always welcome and most are appreciated.  

The fault before was that I broke the objects into the wrong sub classes.  Originally I had the parent Object class,  and subclasses for Room objects, Exist Objects and Person Objects.  This is a horrible idea and leads to unnecessary complexity.  

The newest model:

Object (super class)

MovableObject (isa Object)

PortalObject (isa Object, isnota MovableObject)

PortalObjects, hereafter POB are a much more dynamic version of the previous "room" objects.   A POB behaves in the following manner(s):

1. Object(s) enter into the object containing said portal.

2. Exits an object when contained therein.

3. Can exit (when specified) to a specific object, though by default exists to the parent container object.

If a MovableObject, hereafter MOB, is not contained within the same container as the POB, POB leads into the container.  

If the MOB is contained within the same container as the POB, POB leads out of the container.

By working in this manner, we ensure that the simulation object model more closely mimics the real world, whilst still allowing for exceptions to transpire for non-real world based applications of this group of models as well as anything they may be working on at CERN in Switzerland which breaks our current understanding of physics. 

I haven't had time to implement this new set of models yet, but as I write that code, I will be posting the revised Python source.

Quick Django Tip: Dynamic Application Object Retrieval

In my recent django adventures I needed to introduce site-wide search functionality and in the process of doing so, encountered a small roadblock towards doing so.  Apparently due to the nature of Django's API for db interaction (as of the last stable release version), there is a limitation as to the use of python variables in API calls.  I found this to be a hinderance, but only for so long.  

The follow code snippet was something I whipped together which by utilising Python's 'eval' built-in, overcame the aforementioned limitation regarding the API's ability to interpolate native Python (e.g. non-django explicit) varaibles.

Things to know to understand the following example:  

 search_input is a list of cleaned and pre-processed user-driven terms, split into separate expressions, (e.g. ["dynamic langauge", "agile", "programming", "paradigm"]). 

 search_schema is a dictionary in which the key is the django model/class through whose objects we are attempting to search, and the value is a list of specific model attributes to attempt said search.  (e.g.   User_Profile : ['firstname' , 'lastname', 'address_1', 'bio_info', 'favourite_books'])

container_xref is a simple alias mapping for the actual django application names to our internal references inside this search code base.  Obviously this whole bit could be written without said setup, but for readability given the scope of the actual application involved, and the fact that I was not searching simply a few static fields in one django application, but several dozen fields through about two dozen separate applications, this container_xref dict was appropriate.   It is through this mapping dict which we place any matched object results (so as to not waste any additional space via unnecessary list initialisations.) for eventual results generation.

Note: the key "total_results" in the container_xref was a simple means of keeping track of overall search matches, rather than relying upon the Django templating engine (view) from doing work responsible from the processing (controller) perspective.  In retrospect, there are better ways this could have been handled, and in future point revisions, this will be addressed.

------

for search_string in search_input:

  for application in search_schema.keys():

    for attribute in search_schema[application]:

code_to_eval = "%s.objects.filter( %s__icontains='%s' ).order_by('-id')" %       

                     (str(application), str(attribute), str(search_string))

        try:

          eval_results = eval(code_to_eval)

          for eval_result in eval_results:

            if eval_result not in container_xref[application]:

              container_xref[application].append(eval_result)

              container_xref['total_results'] += 1

        except Exception:

    ### Case specific exception handler types, assignments and resultant actions 

          ### specific to each application in which the above is implemented, go here.

-----

As can be seen from the above, simple inline substitution proceeded by evaluation of said string results in post-compilation dynamic search functionalities within django, addressing simple problems one might run into with the existing API which will most likely be addressed in future versions.  

Your results may vary.

Eric

Ruby: Somehow I overlooked this Gem of a Language

About 5 years ago I started looking into a language that prior to it's "Rails" fame, was lesser known and even lesser utilised.  I tried it a bit and found it leaving me wanting more.  I've kept tabs on it over the years, reading the tutorials and writing several quasi-AI experimental applications for my SimulaE research, but I ended up being enticed by Python, a language which I stand by, including the wonderful (but until recently unused by me) framework Django (Python's Rail's equivalent, focused on Publishing).   

I've programmed professionally using Python for several contracts/years now and find it quite enjoyable.  In fact, I'm currently coding specifically in Python for Inkedmagonline.com, but that doesn't mean that I don't continue my personal exploration and education for both personal and professional reasons.  I decided to re-experience Ruby by picking up the hallowed PickAxe book and giving it another honest chance.  I'm glad I did.  

I believe that Python, and the values espoused in Tim Peter's "De Zen van Python" (The Zen of Python) (my copy just happens to be in Dutch, otherwise I'd post it for others) have helped me to look at Ruby in a different light.  There are some key differences in the two languages, but I can see now the inherent power in Ruby that I was overlooking before.  In fact, some of those key pieces, syntactically as they were which make Ruby so enticing this time around are the very same 'features' I feel are missing in Python.  It only took me working in an environment with situations where said language features would prove the best solution to the problem(s) on hand for me to realise it.

I am not going to spend time detailing all of the specifics, though I may mention one or two nonetheless.  I'm more so bringing this point up so that others might be reminded that giving something new a single chance might be to your own disadvantage.  After all, I didn't like Python the first time I tried it either.  I think it is partially a matter of how we grow as developers that allow us to know what we're missing, that same spark of realisation that gives us the "a ha" of relief when we find it hiding in a new language, programming methodology, etc.  

What brought me back to looking into Ruby a second time is of all things, Smalltalk.  The whole "everything is an object" concept is nothing new to me, or to programming languages.  However in dynamic strongly typed languages, it is.  More importantly is manner of how even rudimentary objects such as integers, floats and strings are treated in Ruby.  They have methods which can be both called using the standard instance.methodname call format, and have their standard methods overridden.  The second being something far more wonky and kludgy in Python (and a non-option in perl).  

The fact that key methods are instance based such as "len" or "length" for example makes a world of difference for consistency.  It speaks to the overall design that "Matz" (Yukihiro Matsumoto creator of Ruby) had in mind during the planning phase.  In Python, a language in which everything is truly an object as well, this starts to get rather confusing.  While Python does treat every integer and string as an object, it mixes the traditional functional paradigm for calling items such as 'len' so that to find the value of 'a', one would type len(a), as opposed to the more object based a.len ..  This seems counter-intuitive and quite frankly a real surprise when you look at the overall design of Python.

I'm not ripping on Python as I do wholeheartedly enjoy the language, I'm just starting to feel aches and pains over decisions which are ingrained into the language, as well as not being seen as an issue or being addressed in py3k (or Python 3000/Python v3.0) as it were.  I just think that my eyes have been opened to Ruby again and I like what I'm seeing.  I am actively looking to find a future professionally as it were utilising it as nothing beats having fun while accomplishing what one would hope accounts to 'great' things.  We'll see what the future holds.

Next Step:  Migrate my SimulaE virtual world/real model object simulation from Python into Ruby as a test run.  Lather, rinse, repeat and then see what the side-by-side comparison's look like.

Until next time...

The Importance of Being Challenged

In this most recent engineering, architecting and development endeavour which I simply refer to as my "job" or "contract", I have come to some conclusions which I feel require sharing.  I'll be very straightforward so as to not waste certain readers' time.  Many of the more seasoned lifetime coders will know (and have experienced many times over) that which I am writing about, which can be summed up as such:  If you are not being constantly challenged, you are atrophying as a developer.

I often write about my own experiences as I know them better than any single other developers experience(s).  This is not because I feel that I'm the end all be all of coders.  Far from it, I do feel that I'm good at what I do, however I prefer to look at my writings as a form of navel gazing, a self-reflective ascertaining how I can better grow in my art and profession.  It is exactly the same manner in which I'm going to proceed regarding today's message.

As I have mentioned, I have most recently jumped into a contract situation at the personal request of a rather successful life-long entrepreneur and given that the opportunity sounded rather interesting, I turned down a salaried position worth almost double because the challenge that was proposed.  Please don't get me wrong, I took a position fixing a half-assed php open-source hot or not style rating system because the employee responsible by no fault of his own necessarily, and due to a lack of a sense of urgency was unable to get a system such as that prescribed, in place by a contractual client deadline.  This was not the reason I took the contract, whilst simultaneously being precisely why I took the contract. 

I'm not a fan of php, and most definitely not a fan of a vast majority of already written php applications open source or otherwise.  What I am referring to more so is that I was brough into an environment where it wasn't the same old same old.  Now I wouldn't have stayed were the job going to continually require php specifically just out of my distaste of said language.   I did know that while I don't consider myself a web developer, I would be required on more than one occasion to work on web applications.  

These weren't to all be simple ones either, any moderately proficient web developer and non-web developer alike could figure a good many of these solutions out.   What really did it for me was that I would be required to not only work under a fairly frequent set of short deadlines due to the nature of the publishing industry as well as the time frame required to keep the site and features current.

The importance of all off these ramblings is this simple point.  Being experienced and disciplined as a Software Engineer/Developer/Architect, etc. ad nauseam helps me to know 'what' I need to do, and gives me insight as to how I might go about solving an issue.  It is however, the actual specifics which put those tidbits of understanding and knowledge into play which go outside a given comfort zone.  It is only then, when we find ourselves in unfamiliar territory, under threat of tight deadlines coupled with our own personal desires to do our best and produce code to which we are proud to associate our name.  

I know that earlier in my career there were times (albeit very few, which I can honestly say) that I too fell into this 'comfort zone'.  I found out though, that this comfort zone is boring and causes one to stagnate.  We code because we love it.  Coding and problem solving is in our blood, and in our hearts.  It is how we look at the world and as such isn't something from which we can remove ourselves.  

If you only know low-level languages, learn a high level language.  If you only work in functional programming paradigms, learn object or aspect oriented ones.  If you only work with interpreted languages, learn compiled langauges, etc.  I'm not saying give up your current lingua franca, I'm simply saying expand your horizons.  The more ways you have of looking at, describing and ultimately understanding a given problem, the more ways you have to solve said problem.  This doesn't solely benefit you, it benefits everyone for whom your code will be written and utilised. 

You knowledge needs to be a living, dynamic pool of information, not a static, never changing one and the way to ensure that is to aggressively fight off the status quo.  Be aggressive, absorb all that you can.  The best way to do this isn't by dipping your toes into the shallow end of the kiddie pool, it is accomplished by putting on your goggles and climbing that high dive, plunging in head first.  

Take a chance for once, you might just learn something.  

Till next time..

Arc: An evolution of Lisp/Scheme, or a outdated implementation at launch.

So the day has finally come in which prolific geek & insightful essayist Paul Graham along with Robert Morris released Arc, their evolutionary love child of Lisp & Scheme.  I think it is safe to say that many of us have (and will continue to) read Paul's wonderful essays on a multitude of geek and coder centric topics, and generally with much joy and agreement.   Many of us have been following the work that Graham and Morris have been undertaking with the new baby "Arc". 

Now that this day has arrived, we can see that it wasn't as deserving of all the pomp and circumstance to which we were planning for it to be attributed.  Seems that there are a considerable amount of deficiencies and intentional short comings to the language.  Normally this wouldn't be seen as anything out of the ordinary for a 'new' language, and would be generally a non-issue.  

The problem is that this is the year 2008 and people have come to expect more from their languages.  Ignoring established standards along with ignoring the need for designing to meet the needs of developers globally all the while using the cop-out of it being purely for exploratory programming is just bad form.   

The world doesn't need another Lisp, the original is wonderful just as it is, that's part of its beauty.  I don't see anything in Arc that couldn't be done as functions and/or macros in Lisp that required the entire 'creation' of a new language.  The way I see it is this; for prototyping as well as production usage we already have several languages that excel in those domains, specifically Lisp and Python.  

Generally the idea of rewriting existing languages with little difference from their predecessor(s) is a waste of time and effort which could've been better spent elsewhere.   There are exceptions to this scenario such as that of Ruby.  It is a language that in the past I used to dislike because of certain key flexibilities much akin to the reasons for spaghetti perl, but it successfully fixes many of perl's wrongs, and corrects some of Pythons short comings as well.  It serves serves enough of a purpose as that of supplanting perl with a better thought out design, and thanks to Rails, its future looks solid.  

Arc on the other hand is like a still born fetus.  Much was expected and there was potential to be just like its parent(s), but death was announced during a delayed delivery and upon further examination, it was discovered that it wasn't a proper offspring, but a clone in fetal form.  My advice to Paul and Robert is the following:  recall the release, and make it truly something worthy of release, with proper compatibility and compliance with modern norms.  Make it usable to others as opposed to just a few tinkerers interested more in lisp and scheme basics. 

An on a more pleasant note to Paul;  Please keep on writing your essays and providing your viewpoints as they are appreciated, I just wish that your judgement call in the case of 'Arc' was as well thought out as your writings have proven to be over time.

The New Django Powered Inked Magazine Website is Up!

This will be rather brief as it is more of an announcement than one of my more traditional journal entries. 

After a  short two or so months from start to finish, I have successfully setup my first Django powered website.  Inked Magazine has been relaunched effective January 2nd, 2008.  This replaces the Joomla powered site which existed prior to both myself and the current ownership of the magazine were involved in the project.  

Phase one has been completed, with extras.  The customer photo galleries, the cover photo application, the user profile system as well as the main magazine feature areas have been established and are active.  As of today, I will have available for all registered users the ability to host a blog on our site (using our software which I wrote in a few days), mind you it is still early in the feature process, though it without doubt serves most blog authors needs.  

I will be adding features as time progresses, but until mid-January 2008, I'm on a tight schedule to build the entire forum application so that the beginning of the "New and Improved" Inked Network can go live.  

I don't think one needs Ruby on Rails when you have Django.  Much of the same great functionality and without having to use Ruby all the while using Python.  [Update: After having revisited Ruby as a language on its own, sans Rails notoriety, I've found that my previous assertions regarding Rails specifically was unwarranted.  It simply took my experiences with Django and Python to make Ruby and Rails far clearer to me.]

I will return to my normal posting after the Forum application is up and running.  

Till then, keep on coding.

Reflections on 2007, Looking forward to 2008

Given that it is nary a few minutes past 22:00 on the east coast of North America, I figure it is time for one of 'those' looking back and looking forward type posts, but with a codedevl slant. This past year has been a rather bizarre one as it marks the first year of my professional career (over 13 years) in which I've been employed by more than two firms/companies. I mean technically I've only been employed by one firm, the time prior and currently I've been self-employed, so does it count?

While this isn't necessarily an issue for many others out there, it was a point of concern for me as I have been traditionally conservative in my career moves and choices. It isn't as if I'd suddenly threw caution to the wind and job hopped. I will say that it was all thanks to the federal government for starting the ball rolling over a year ago when they raided the offices of a previous employer due to nefarious actions of several of their customers (unbeknownst to any of us at the time). The government claims it wasn't a raid but a search and seizure. As far as I know, that is classified as a raid, more so because the agents were wearing bullet proof vests with guns drawn.. all three dozen of them.

I've started to obvious stray from the where I was going. Simply put I found myself working with a skeleton crew at a company for an additional five months while legally being unable to process our normal transactions, hence no hope of future work. The warnings started coming and as such, the few of us which remained knew the end was near so we all started prepping for the day when it would all come crashing to an end, an end to a wonderful half decade as a working family as it were. It took less than a week for me to land a new gig working on a project for Burlington Coat Factory and previously mentioned in a previous entry. I do have to say that I grew more as a software engineer during that first jump into contracting than I had in many of the prior years, including my time as team lead, department lead and CTO.

I brought all of this us because it lead to how I started out the year of 2007. I was finishing up my contract having successfully deployed the new point of sale returned goods system for Burlington's stores nationally. I knew when my last day would be and started to look for interesting jobs, but preferably salaried ones, which I found without trouble, so much to the point that I finished my contract on a Friday and started my next job with Blue Gravity Communications, Inc. the following Monday. As that saga has also come and gone (by my own choice), many things have changed, primarily my outlook on contracting vs. salaried employment, my work environment and my work ethic.

I found that there really isn't a major difference between salaried employment and contract employment, other than the 'false sense' of security in a salaried job. The reality of it is that one can be let-go from a salaried position very easliy, unless you're in Nederland, France, Denmark, Sweden or Norway (and a few others I'm sure I forgot). The overall benefits of being self-employed become clear rather quickly once the newness of contracting fades away. You have more responsibility, and more freedom.

You work harder to prove and build and/or strengthen your reputation, and don't mind it. You have flexible hours (at least in my case and/or other cases where on-site 9-5 is not required, which is a pretty common flexibility. You don't have to deal with as many managers or supervisors. You don't have to stress over working with a certain group of people forever. You are able to work multiple clients simultaneously (as much as you can personally handle), and finally, you truly have more control over yourself and your future than ever afforded in a salaried position.

My environment was always a sticking point throughout my various locales of employment, ranging from a room full of others in a different department, a room full of peers, a room full of subordinates (though I hate the term, being very much an egalitarian), and of course, in a room all by my lonesome. I worked many of my years in a solitary environment, for a full time employer and as such had plenty of human interaction. Yet during those years I yearned for more interaction, a room in which I could openly be around others. I finally got my chance when I became CTO and Development Lead at one company. I was able to secure an open office with no partitions and a relaxed layout.

This proved to be an enjoyable environment, but I found later on that it didn't allow me to produce my best work. Separating myself from the others didn't do much to help either. It was only when I worked as a contractor for my first time that I started to realise what my environmental needs are. I returned into the salaried world and worked side by side with some great people, even entering into the halls of foosball with one of my aforementioned peers. It was only after I re-entered the realm of self-employment contracting for Pinchazo Publishing Group, Inc. (owners of Nylon and Inked magazines most notably), that I setup my home office an came to terms with a new reality.

I work best, in my home office, alone with minimal contact from others with the exception being my request to speak with others over designs or processes changes in order to meet project/structural demands. I do enjoy the company of others but know that I work more diligently, more exacting and am ultimately more focused when in my own space. I did find however that this new environment does have its perks, one of those being flexible time to meet up with peers and past co-workers for quality time.

This leads me to my final point of realisation. My work ethic has changed dramatically for the best. To be honest I found that I was too easily distracted in other environments when a salaried employee. I had far less "in-the-zone" moments when in a workplace, and on someone else's payroll. Again I think this is due to distraction and a certain level of security (a false one at that). I'm not particularly fond of making this public admission, but at least I've recognised it and willingly state it for the record. I know what I need to be the best that I can, producing the best work of which I'm capable. Now that my reputation and future prospects rely mostly upon my current projects and the manner in which they are complete, it makes me stay more focused and on task.

I also must say that due to the lowered stress in my career at this juncture in time, I am able to enjoy my art/trade for more than ever before. When one couples that feeling of relief along with my combined experiences, gained knowledge and wisdom (or lack thereof at times), caring becomes a top priority. I care about my work, and I strive to produce the best that I can. I own the process, the engineering, the schedule and the maintenance and as such demand of myself nothing but my best, and I love every moment of it now. I know what I'm worth now, and I know what my code and expertise are worth and what it takes to ensure that I'm operating at my best.

Finally, this brings me onto my outlook for the upcoming year. Hopefully, much of the same and barring any catastrophes, I see a very promising future ahead with the current outfit for which I'm contracting. The work is exciting, doing things the right way and engineering a whole system is something upon which I thrive. I look forward to learning new technologies, I'm excited about the prospect of new advances and of course, I'm happy that I love coding and truly feel as if I've found my ultimate environment to do what I feel that I do best: Engineer great software.

Happy New Year to all, here's looking forward to a great 2008!

Eric