If only they would do the reader the simple, and most gracious service of defining precisely what they mean by this obscure "TPS" acronym.
...and before you downvote this comment (because I can smell your itchy little fingers all the way from the otherside of the internet), yes, I can assure you that I did actually Google for the answer. And yes, I did discern what is meant by TPS.
But that isn't the point. The point isn't that I'm a lazy slacker, and/or an ignorant yokle because I didn't already know the meaning of the abreviation innately, and feel inconvenienced by having to open another browser window, and search for some clue.
The point is that the author is assuming everyone will immediately know and understand that acronym, but meanwhile, when I conduct my search, I am forced to assume that my chosen definition is correct, wihout actually knowing for sure.
And for that reason, I'm going to leave out the meaning I've chosen as the author's intended definition for TPS. I have no way of knowing whether my assumption was accurate. So the mystery persists. What does TPS actually mean? Go search for it, you lazy, ignorant slacker.
>The point is that the author is assuming everyone will immediately know and understand that acronym, but meanwhile, when I conduct my search, I am forced to assume that my chosen definition is correct, wihout actually knowing for sure.
If you don't know what the acronym means, then the article is not meant for you. The author did not write it nor intend it as a general introduction for newcomers to learn the basics.
It's about some some specific techniques in a specific field.
With your logic, why stop at explaining TPS? He would also have to spell out IRQ, explain what IRQ interupts are, what is a tasket, what does it mean to 'pin' a process, what NoSQL means, what's this Redis thing he mentions etc etc.
(That the author of TFA abuses the acronym is beside the point).
There's little excuse for laziness when pursuing new knowledge. A two second Google search and a new tab is not a burden. If you didn't get the answer first time, you should qualify the search with one of the other keywords from the article.
A certain level of reader sophistication is assumed, and not everything is explained with a high level of hand-holding. It's a technical tutorial, not a beginner's tutorial.
In general you'd be right, but in this specific case there's a fair bit of ambiguity as to what "transaction" is taken to mean. A definition or two wouldn't have gone amiss here.
If only they would do the reader the simple, and most gracious service of defining precisely what they mean by this obscure "TPS" acronym.
...and before you downvote this comment (because I can smell your itchy little fingers all the way from the otherside of the internet), yes, I can assure you that I did actually Google for the answer. And yes, I did discern what is meant by TPS.
But that isn't the point. The point isn't that I'm a lazy slacker, and/or an ignorant yokle because I didn't already know the meaning of the abreviation innately, and feel inconvenienced by having to open another browser window, and search for some clue.
The point is that the author is assuming everyone will immediately know and understand that acronym, but meanwhile, when I conduct my search, I am forced to assume that my chosen definition is correct, wihout actually knowing for sure.
And for that reason, I'm going to leave out the meaning I've chosen as the author's intended definition for TPS. I have no way of knowing whether my assumption was accurate. So the mystery persists. What does TPS actually mean? Go search for it, you lazy, ignorant slacker.