1. 10

  2. 6

    I’m just gonna go out of my way to emit a critic of this article, because hey, I didn’t like it, might as well spend more time on it.

    I feel there was great potential for something really interesting, but I found the structure to be lacking. Throughout, I wasn’t sure where I was being taken, and I kept hoping for something new to happen. Instead, I met several “absolutely bounded queues that are full is usually a bad thing”, which is not far from a tautology as far as I’m concerned; good structure might have averted my desire to drop off of the article midway through. Is there a solution at the end, aside from “plan your stuff better”? sigh now I have to go and check. Hang on.

    Well, there’s a brief portion on “measure your bottlenecks throughout the software”. I mean, sure, interesting, but with better structure, it would have been made clear that the problem is solved at least in part (at the very least, accounted for), if you implement such a feature.

    If you’re going to communicate something, structure matters a lot. Otherwise, good content, keep up the effort, whoever-wrote-that-who-might-be-reading-this.

    -Signed: a guy who struggles at communication.