Good talk, but would have loved to hear a bit more about the practical issues when implementing TDD. Given the short time it was a pity to hear 20-or-so minutes being 'wasted' by explaining what TDD is.
Had hoped for more on interaction design rather than just colors and fonts. I think that most of the tips and ideas mentioned are already known to the audience, and the level of the talk could be considerably higher. Tip: Always save your slides as PDF to prevent problems when needing to run them on another laptop.
Well-paced, informative, and with some good tips and opinions. Really touched the essence of REST rather than some treatment of HTTP verbs and status codes. Also really liked the humour and presentation style. Awesome presentation!
David: With presentations this good I usually don't mind if they go a bit overtime :) If you want to trim a couple of minutes from your talk for 45 minute slots I would remove the discussion of bad examples in the Twitter API, or merge them into the slides before with the ACME URLs. Many people in the audience probably have already seen some abuse of URLs and HTTP verbs, while the treatment of hypermedia formats will be less familiar to them.
Very disappointing talk. Seemed badly prepared (sloppy slides with typos and bad indentation, finished 15 min early) and the examples (too often the same) did not always match the definition on earlier slides. Different examples and more practical tips on how to achieve low coupling and high cohesion (maybe some refactoring examples) would certainly improve this talk.
Good talk, nice subject. Missed the relationship between theory (Chomksy hierarchy) and practice a bit though. Maybe some treatment of the strengths and limitations of the different parser classes (with examples) could make your talk even better.
I think that a bit more preparation could have really helped this talk. Right now it felt a bit messy, both in speaker alternation, unfamiliarity with the laptop OS and time management.
As someone who has seen some docker demo but never got more in depth, it felt like some of the more interesting parts (like tags and layers) got skipped. It may help to communicate the content and target audience more clearly.
I personally missed a bit more in-depth theory on neutral networks, and actual pointers on how to use/implement the Fann library. A simpler demo application (of 1-3 php files) could have made the examples more clear. I would advise to leave out the symfony console part; that time could have been spent on much more interesting content :)
Great talk, with very nice slides and presentation style. I really liked the different point of view, a nice eye-opener. Only bit of critique I can think of was that it felt a bit philosophical. Maybe some practical pointers for combining temporal and structural models in an application would be a nice addition.
Really awesome talk, with great slides and a humorous presentation style that not distract from the very informative content. I really liked how you made the transition to command buses feel natural as an evolution from the original code and worth the real-life message analogies. Thanks for the great talk!
Great talk, but I would have appreciated some more code samples or practical pointers. Also I missed a bit of a wow-factor with novel insights, but maybe that was just a consequence off there being a lot of talks on related subjects earlier in the schedule.
Nice topic, and good talk. From the description I had hoped for a bit more content on more advanced tools. Right now the first 20/30 minutes were spent on topics I think most of the audience was already familiar with. Good main message though!
I think it is very good that this topic is being treated, and I liked the calm presentation style, Lego animations and pragmatic advice. The bit on UML and drawing tools, though promised to keep it short, was probably still a bit too long. I would have rather liked some practical example of adapting design/drawings to changing requirements.
Good talk, with nice practical examples. No need to be nervous, because you clearly know your matter well. I think the talk could use a bit more structure though, with some explanation of the common points and differences of the various ML methods presented, and which methods to choose for which problems.
Best talk I saw at this conference, in my opinion! I liked the novel subject and insights, and the 'evangelism' for seasoned developers to stay in a technical role than move into line management.
(Sorry I can't deliver this feedback as a shit sandwhich, but I really have no negative point to put in between ;) )
Thank you for the very comprehensive overview of incompatibilities and new features in PHP 7.1. To save some time, you could shorten the treatment of some of the more obscure cases that most developers do not use anyway (octal literals, deprecation of `"$a[-1]"`) in my opinion. Also, it might be useful to show the relevant 'detection methods' for each feature/incompatibility on the bottom/side of the slide where it is discussed.
All in all, this was a really useful talk.
I think this was a really useful talk, and well-delivered. I liked how you described the process by which you came up with your current solution, and the iterative improvements you made. Nevertheless, there are some things that could be improved in my humble opinion:
1) I think it would be good to make a distinction between the speedup (due to parallellisation) and other advantages provided by Docker (isolation, testing on different PHP versions, etc.). Running test groups in parallel is probably also possible without Docker (using GNU 'parallel' alone), so it would be good to 'justify' the use of Docker on other grounds.
2) If I read your slides correctly, it seems that the first complete test run (plain PHPUnit, all tests) is actually faster than the last example (Docker, in parallel, with output shown). That feels strange, given the goal of making tests run faster. Maybe the trick you mentioned to speed up Docker container startup time can improve on this.
Thank you for the useful content!