HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
EnterpriseQualityCoding
FizzBuzzEnterpriseEdition
Java2013–2026
EnterpriseQualityCoding / FizzBuzzEnterpriseEdition

FizzBuzzEnterpriseEdition

FizzBuzz Enterprise Edition is a no-nonsense implementation of FizzBuzz made by serious businessmen for serious business purposes.

216Distinct people
237Mentions
3Explicit recommenders
23.9KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

FizzBuzz Enterprise Edition is a no-nonsense implementation of FizzBuzz made by serious businessmen for serious business purposes.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

Issue #393 - "My printer isn't working" is a highly recommended read in this repository. Every time I thought it couldn't get any worse, someone posts another atrocity. It's a…

ahofmann used a recommendation phrase. 3 indexed comments match. This is a phrase match, not a verdict.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 6:01:08 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year237 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2013-03-18 16:29:35 UTC to 2026-10-31 00:51:11 UTC.

01020302013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 14 mentions; 6 submissions, 8 comments20132014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 15 mentions; 3 submissions, 12 comments2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 11 mentions; 0 submissions, 11 comments2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 19 mentions; 4 submissions, 15 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 15 mentions; 2 submissions, 13 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 19 mentions; 0 submissions, 19 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 16 mentions; 2 submissions, 14 comments20192020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 11 mentions; 0 submissions, 11 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 23 mentions; 1 submissions, 22 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 28 mentions; 3 submissions, 25 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 19 mentions; 0 submissions, 19 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 15 mentions; 4 submissions, 11 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 19 mentions; 1 submissions, 18 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 13 mentions; 0 submissions, 13 comments. Incomplete calendar period.2026*

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20132013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC1468
20142014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC15312
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC11011
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC19415
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC15213
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC19019
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC16214
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC11011
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC23122
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC28325
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC19019
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC15411
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC19118
2026 (partial)2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC13013

What Hacker News says

19 sources
This is like "Why Don't Mathematicians Learn to Program?" "I had this talk where I wanted to feel superior so I showed an obtuse way to notate a simple situation" "You can see my code I showed a room full of people who have more important things to do then to study arcane math symbols that are of no use to them:" https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris... "I mean who in the hell could call themselves a mathematician without learning how to recognize obscure abstraction principles and language features of Java, something they'll probably never need to use?!?!" "Some of these people where even smart, I tell you! They are big people who are productive but I have no idea how you could be productive or smart without knowing how to recognize this obscure thing" Seriously, if you pulled in a bunch of CS people and showed the
Read the rest
m this: lambda x: x And they didn't know what it meant, you have a point. If you pull them in and show them something they don't use often, probably will never really use, and use that as a basis of their worth then I don't feel you have a correct set of KPIs for what makes a good scientist or researcher.
In Why Don't Computer Scientists Learn Math?
This article itches me on so many levels. It is not wrong directly but it is definitely not the truth either. I expected more from someone who claims to be a scientist. The main issue I have with the piece is the oversimplification of the equation to such an extend important variables of the equation are removed without mention or explanation of their removal. An example would be project size. Yes for FizzBuzz globals are fine probably and FizzBuzz enterprise shows beautifully that overengineering is a thing (https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...). All of the authors statements would hold here. We all agree and smile. But the same architectural choices make sense in many large enterprise projects. Take the comment on large number of small files for example. This gives less merge conflicts (amongst many other thin
Read the rest
gs). Yes you working alone on your tiny project won't notice but try working in a single large file with 100 devs committing to it. Good luck with the merge conflicts! Large methods? Same issue. Everybody has to change code in that one method, merge conflict. Inheritance? Nice thing if you build an sdk for others to use and want to hand them a default base version. They can extend and override your virtual methods to get custom behaviour. No code duplication which you have to maintain and keep in sync! Wow! Next up I would like to address the difficult naming. Everybody nodding that that was bad. Nice to write it down. However, from a scientist I would expect a disclaimer that this was based on personal experience with programmers and not the ground truth for pprogrammers or cite a credible source. I'd say there is only a small fraction who do that. Disclaimer on this is that both programmer and scientist should work together if one side does not understand the naming conventions for the project. Simple-minded care-free can give you a prototype which is the scientist job. Enterprise programmers (who often are computer scientists) give you your product. Tl;dr stop comparing apples and oranges. Or as a true scientist at least describe context and omittance of various variables. O, and share your gdamn ugly code so we don't need to read your papers and implement it ourselves from scratch. That's the true waste here ;).
In Why bad scientific code beats code following “best practices” (2014)
A few years back I worked on a project (by myself!) where I inherited an epic codebase that was basically the Enterprise Fizzbuzz application scaled up to ~30 person years of effort - it had tens of thousands of classes and a seeming desire to use every known feature of Enterprise Java and every Design Pattern - actually finding where stuff actually happened in the haystack of abstractions was quite entertaining. https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris... NB I have a strange definition of "entertaining" in a work context - I was contracting at the time.
In Software Design Patterns Are Not Goals, They Are Tools
Hi, author here. > since it's so trivial that it leaves the "how does a 'real' compiler parse" question unanswered. I'm sure it is tempting to bake everything into this project. After implementing a "real" parser, you might want to implement a "real" transform, an optimizing step perhaps, you could keep going until it's totally unrecognizable (https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...)... the "give a mouse a cookie" effect applies here. However, trying to teach everything at once isn't an effective way to teach people. I think this is largely why compilers are so unapproachable to most people. I don't expect someone who has taken even just a simple Compilers 101 class to get anything out of this project. I'm hoping that I can make someone previously unaware of how compilers work to feeling somewhat comfortable with t
Read the rest
hem. For a project that you can read through in 20-30 minutes, I think that's already a pretty big goal. Self-hoisted compilers are cool, but that would contradict the goal of this project.
In Super Tiny Compiler

Showing the 15 most recent of 19 sources. Enable JavaScript to search and browse every indexed mention.

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.