[jrumbut]

That's funny, I came to the almost opposite conclusion that the obvious answer was that everything is tradeoffs and compromises.

I suppose very easy things like consistent indentation width might be done perfectly in a codebase, but any non-trivial thing always could be "more X" or "less Y".

[greghausheer]

"I came to the almost opposite conclusion that the obvious answer was that everything is tradeoffs and compromises."

Probably the smartest answer there is.

[crimsonalucard]

No this is not true. Definitely not smart either. Not everything in the universe is a nice yin yang tradeoff, this is a philosophical and scientific mistake. There exists in this world solutions to problems that are the most optimal.

When humans think in terms of design tradeoffs they are thinking in a domain where there exists no theoretical or mathematical technique to find the optimum. This does not mean a technique can never exist, it just indicates a lack of knowledge. The keyword is design. How do you design the best looking website vs. how do you design the shortest distance between two points? I would say for the later, we have enough knowledge and theory to say that the shortest distance between two points does not need to designed... it can be calculated.

Design implies alternative designs and tradeoffs due to the lack of techniques to determine or find an optimum. Calculation implies greater knowledge.

[kthejoker2]

Most real world problems have constraints that render global optimums moot. Usually opportunity cost, but also risk, experiential components, satisficing ...

In fact, any interview problem with a global optimum is worthless for evaluating candidate's ability to handle ambiguity or demonstrate capacity for creativity, second order thinking, communication ...

Expecting candidates to lead with absolutism like in your post os a good recipe for finding Brilliant Jerks.

[crimsonalucard]

Dude, the entire field of Machine learning is an attempt to find a global optimum. It is an attempt to turn what is otherwise a design problem into a calculation.

To say that global optimums are moot or don't exist is categorically wrong. Global optimums and trade offs exist in equal measure everywhere. I value good judgment in both.

Catering to one extreme is unwise on every level.

>Expecting candidates to lead with absolutism like in your post os a good recipe for finding Brilliant Jerks.

First off I never said or implied this. My post is just saying that not Everything is a design tradeoff. Second off are you implying I'm a Jerk? Did you just call me a Jerk?