They would see nothing wrong with it
They would see nothing wrong with it
Grammar is too woke
It’s a small price to pay to keep pronouns away from our games.
Python is truly a mess when Docker is considered a solution.
Nothing comes close to Perl’s abuse of global variables. Oh you called this function? Take a guess which global variables it will use.
Unfortunately it’s the exciting politics that gets all the attention. Democrats likely lost because they’re just too boring.
Are people forgetting his Dijon Mustard scandal? Unforgivable.
I don’t trust you. There must be some hidden meaning.
Not only are our heads in constant motion. Our eyes are also always in motion. We’re constantly, quickly and accurately shifting our attention to different points in our vision.
From the original document:
Software manufacturers should build products in a manner that systematically prevents the introduction of memory safety vulnerabilities, such as by using a memory safe language or hardware capabilities that prevent memory safety vulnerabilities. Additionally, software manufacturers should publish a memory safety roadmap by January 1, 2026.
My interpretation is that smart pointers are allowed, as long it’s systematically enforced. Switching to a memory safe language is just one example.
Some person I just met at a party asked me if I have Asperger’s. He explained he has Asperger’s himself and just wondered.
I thought it was a rude remark of him. Especially since we barely know each other. I certainly don’t have Asperger’s.
This was some years ago.
Either way, I just got diagnosed.
Apparently it’s super successful. Has made $3 billion within a year.
TAOCP is a misleading title. It shouldn’t be computer programming. It should be computer science.
For most people, programming is the engineering discipline. I think that’s a very different art form. Software engineers are rarely dealing with the type of problems TAOCP is concerned about.
There’s probably some truth in “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”
Squadron “Feature Complete” 42
I’m mostly working in Java now. I’m proficient to the degree that I can solve most things without looking for reference online. I think that matters most to me.
OO languages typically use garbage collector. The main purpose of the borrow checker is to resolve the ambiguity of who is responsible for deallocating the data.
In GC languages, there’s usually no such ambiguity. The GC takes care of it.
Sounds like you’re thinking more about the builder pattern.
Mainstream statically-typed OOP allows straightforward backwards compatible evolution of types, while keeping them easy to compose. I consider this to be one of the killer features of mainstream statically-typed OOP, and I believe it is an essential feature for programming with many people, over long periods of time.
I 100% agree with this. The strength of OOP comes with maintaining large programs over a long time. Usually with ever changing requirements.
This is something that’s difficult to demonstrate with small toy examples, which gives OOP languages an unfair disadvantage. Yeah, it might be slower. Yeah, there might be more boilerplate to write. But how does the alternative solutions compare with regards to maintainability?
The main problem with OOP is that maintainability doesn’t necessarily come naturally. It requires lots of experience and discipline to get it right. It’s easy to paint yourself in the corner if you don’t know what you’re doing.
Math skills can occasionally be useful, but I don’t see it as a dealbreaker.
The good thing about being good with math is that it usually means you’re a good problem solver, and problem solving is an important skill for programming. But the reverse isn’t necessarily true. You can be good at problem solving but still be bad at math.
I would say if you’re struggling with the programming courses, then maybe look somewhere else. Otherwise, go ahead.