KSM Technology Partners LLC is seeking solutions-focused professionals who enjoy using technology to solve complex, open-ended business problems. A KSM Consultant develops custom application and integration software for our clients in the pharmaceutical and utilities industries. The ideal candidate is a multi-disciplinary professional with 2+ years of experience writing great code in multiple languages, eliciting and documenting requirements, and designing and executing thorough unit and functional tests. Our consultants work in small, cross-functional, hyper-productive teams that deliver business value quickly and with a minimum of overhead.
Our offices and many of our clients are located in the greater Philadelphia area, particularly in the route 202 corridor in the western suburbs. Telecommuting is occasionally available for some engagements. We prefer local candidates.
This is a full-time position; we are not a body shop looking for subcontractors. We offer a competitive salary, flexible working hours, paid time off, healthcare and long-term disability coverage, and 401K with a generous match and no-wait vesting.
We will not consider candidates presented by agencies or other third parties. Applicants must be able to work unrestricted in the U.S.
If you are interested, email us at careers [/at/] ksmpartners [\dot\] com.
One of the key attributes I look for when writing and reviewing code is that code should express the intent of the developer more than the mechanism used to achieve that intent. In other words, code should read as much as possible as if it were a description of the end goal to be achieved. The mechanism used to achieve that goal is secondary.
Over the years, I’ve found this emphasis improves the quality of a system by making it easier to write correct code. By removing the distraction of the mechanism underneath the code: it’s easier for the author of that code to stay in the mindset of the business process they’re implementing. To see what I mean, consider how hard it would be to query a SQL database if every query was forced to specify the details of each table scan, index lookup, sort, join, and filter. The power of SQL is that it eliminates the mechanism of the query from consideration and lets a developer focus on the logic itself. The computer handles the details. Compilers do the same sort of thing for high level languages: coding in Java means not worrying about register allocation, machine instruction ordering, or the details of free memory reclamation. In the short-term, these abstractions make it easier to think about the problem I’m being paid to solve. Over a longer time scale, the increased distance between the intent and mechanism makes it easier to improve the performance or reliability of a system. Adding an index can transparently change a SQL query plan and Java seamlessly made the jump from an interpreter to a compiler.
One of the unique sources of power in the Lisp family of languages is a combination of features that makes it easier build the abstractions necessary to elevate code from mechanism to intent. The combination of dynamic typing, higher order functions, good data structures, and macros can make it possible to develop abstractions that allow developers to focus more on what matters, the intent of the paying customer, and less on what doesn’t. In this article, I’ll talk about what that looks like for the calculator example and how Clojure brings the tools needed to focus on the intent of the code.
In my last post, I started porting the RPN calculator example from Java to Clojure, moving a functional program into a functional language. In this post, I finish the work and show how the Clojure calculator models both state and calculator commands.
If you’ve never played it before, a hand of manual testing misery poker plays out something like this:
We automate functional testing for a reason: the alternative is tedious, resource-intensive, and expensive. So why do test suites still comprise so many manual tests? Continue Reading…
So far in this series, I’ve taken a basic calculator written in Java and transformed it from a command-oriented procedural design into a more functional style. In some ways, this has made for simpler code:
Despite this difficulty, there is value in the functional design approach; What we need is a new notation. To show what I mean, this article switches gears and ports the latest version of the calculator from Java to Clojure. This reduces the size of the code from 327 lines down to a more reasonable-for-the-functionality 82. More importantly, the new notation opens up new opportunities for better expressiveness and further optimization. Building on the Clojure port, I’ll ultimately build out a version of the calculator that uses eval for legitimate purposes, and compiles calculator macros and can run them almost as fast as code written directly in Java.
In my last post I wrote that the reality of automated functional testing has so far failed to live up to my expectations. In this post I’ll define what I mean by functional testing. What follows might not be the definition you’re familiar with, and I don’t mean to suggest that this is the only valid definition. It is certainly influenced by the industries I work with, where:
From my first encounter with HTMLUnit over ten years ago, I had high hopes for automated functional testing for web applications. Comprehensive test suites would run continuously and unattended, and notify us promptly of incipient problems. We would dazzle our customers and quality auditors with slick, comprehensive, and electronically signed hypertext reports. We would dispense with hundreds of person-hours of manual testing, and pass the cost savings on to our customers. We would retire waist-high piles of paper test scripts and reports to long term storage and, after the obligatory retention period, dance around the bonfire where they burned. Continue Reading…
One nice aspect of the Freemarker template engine is the way that it intelligently displays typed model data. Dates, for example, are presented in a human-readable format which can be controlled in the view using Freemarker builtins. This works well, and is good for helping view concerns stay in the view code. However, one difficulty with this feature is that Freemarker doesn’t understand all domain types out of the box. joda-time DateTime objects are a good example, and this article shows how to teach Freemarker how to render that type of value.
Sometimes, it’s easy to focus so much on the architecture of a system that the details of its implementation get lost. While it’s true that inattention to architectural concerns can cause a system to fail, it’s also true that poor attention to the details can undermine even the best overall system design. This post covers a few minor details of code structure that I’ve found to be useful in my work:
In this post I will explain how to use Sonatype Nexus Repository Manager as your Sencha Package repository.
If you use Sencha Touch or ExtJS for development, Sencha has provided a tool called Sencha Cmd which “is a cross-platform command line tool that provides many automated tasks around the full life-cycle of your applications from generating a new project to deploying an application to production.” One of the new features is the ability to have “packages”. If you come from the Java world like I do a package is the equivalent to a JAR library file. A re-usable block of code that can be versioned and stored for others to use. Sencha Package Manager is designed to solve two basic problems: consumption and distribution.