-
Short variables and lack of comments...
… a source code reviewer nightmare. The must-read lwn.net ran a nice open letter to a Linux kernel developer. I’d like to cite this bit about code review (see also Re: Open Source != peer review):
-
Parallel building the CDK
Some time ago, I added parallel building targets for CDK’s Ant
build.xml
. Now that I am setting up a Nightly for the jchempaint-primary branch, and really only want to report on the CDK modulescontrol
andrender
, I need the build system to use a properties files to define which modules should be compiled. -
Software is a Method (Meme)
- it provides a recipe to approach (scientific) questions
- let’s you cook up a (scientific) answer
- you can use it as a black box (like an orbitrap)
- you can refine existing methods (well, some can, others don’t)
- it has an error (but I do not believe it is normally distributed)
-
Solubility Data in Bioclipse #1
I am working on converting Jean-Claude’s Solubility data to RDF (after Pierre’s model, see here, here, and here, here for first data exploration), so that I can integrate it with data from DBPedia, Freebase, rdf.openmolecules.net, etc. Bioclipse will be the workbench in which this will be visualized, and just got graph depiction online using Zest. The screenshot does not show the RDF yet, but that will follow soon:
-
Re: Open Source != peer review
Andrew has an interesting thread on the content of a slide of a recent presentation. In the comments you can read the back and forth on things; indeed, there are very many aspects to things and he did ask a very complex question, of which he assumed that I understood what he was asking, and I indeed assumed too that I understood what he was asking:
-
Finding the commit that causes the regressions...
CDK 1.1.x releases are well in progress, but a recent commit broke a number of unit tests. Here comes git-bisect.