HN user
I think you missed the point. It doesn't matter if people used paper or anything. They can do whatever they want, as long as their they can commit code to the source control with high quality.
I didn't say print is bad. There is a ton of problems where debuggers alone are not enough and print is required. I meant choosing print when the debugger is readily available and allows developers to get what they need without constantly changing the code to insert "print" and recompile/rerun the code.
The other side is those people who do not find those kind of bugs annoying
Anecdotally, I find these are the same people who work less effectively and efficiently. At my company, I know people who mainly use Notepad++ for editing code when VSCode (or another IDE) is readily available, who use print over debuggers, who don't get frustrated by runtime errors that could be caught in IDEs, and who opt out of using coding assistants. I happen to know as a matter of fact that the person who codes in Notepad++ frequently has trivial errors, and generally these people don't push code out as fast they could.
And they don't care to change the way they work even after seeing the alternatives and knowing they are objectively more efficient.
I am not their managers, so I say to myself "this is none of my business" and move on. I do feel pity for them.
Apparently people can't read.
I don't know which part of "to me" is not clear.
I don't design PCB boards (thus the "useless" word), and the comment was apparently a lighthearted joke in response to another lighthearted joke.
Requirements: Mac computers with Apple silicon or AMD GPUs
Apple still remembers those Macbook Pros/iMac and Mac Pros with AMD GPUs. A bit unexpected.
FSF?
Interesting. In Cody training sessions given by Sourcegraph, I saw OpenCtx mentioned a few times "casually", and the focus is always on Cody core concepts and features like prompt engineering and manual context etc. Sounds like for enterprise customers, setting up context is meant for infrastructure teams within the company, and end users mostly should not worry about OpenCxt?
Is this similar to what Sourcegraph's OpenCtx tries to do?
Has OpenCtx ever gained much traction?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algorithm
In mathematics and computer science, an algorithm is a finite sequence of mathematically rigorous instructions, typically used to solve a class of specific problems or to perform a computation.
Looks good to me.
And did you just question "WHERE" and "ORDER BY" in SQL? I wouldn't do that. There are probably a ton of algorithms and optimizations done there. In my very naive understanding, quick sort is at least worth something.
Yeah, people thought Walt Disney was crazy at the time as well.
Exactly. I would use the same logic and argue that it is not fair for CEOs flying in private jets when other workers commute in car traffic. If the day comes when Elon Musk, Andy Jassy and alike fly commercial, I wouldn't complain a word about going to office five days a week.
Well, I wouldn't. Teleportation wouldn't even be necessary in my case as it takes 5 minutes for me to get to my office. I just don't see any point in being in office on days when I am focusing on writing code to push features out.
I wonder at OpenAI, Anthropic etc, how many people actually believe in "creating generalized artificial intelligence"
A caveat -- FTC is currently looking into the deal between Microsoft and OpenAI.
Not everyone has a 4090 or M4 Max at home.
Read my comment and all previous comments again.
Don't write such meaningless words and waste your and other people's time when you don't even understand what people are talking about.
To be honest, it's a pattern I see under every PHP thread:
(Neutral) PHP news -> PHP bad -> PHP not bad
Even if people didn't actually say "PHP bad"
Which part is condescending? Maybe spell that out?
From what I can see it's some pretty unbiased conclusion that's quite reflective of the truth.
My guess: shopping results, followed by sponsored ads, followed by 1-2 results that are not ads but you don't care, some combination of news/Twitter/Youtube videos, more shopping results, then finally real search results. If "AI summary" didn't appear at the top.
I have seen that so many times that I can scroll to the "correct" part of the Google search result page within 2 seconds without thinking.
Now that I write this down, I realized how horrible this is.
It could be much easier for user defined functions to collide with standard functions, especially when it happens unintentionally.
Someone else creates a function named array_something in the namespace. Maybe it already exists in earlier versions, maybe it happens to collide with one of the four introduced in 8.4. This function is accessible to you in the current scope. Now, you try to call the function like the way it is defined in the standard library. You get a very confusing error and spend 10 minutes trying to figure if it is you or PHP that is hallucinating. Turns out you have been inadvertently calling that other user defined function. The other user may be completely unaware of the fact that they created a function with naming collision.
To combat this, you need strong IDE help including static type checking, which is not always there for everybody. And it still doesn't help with cases where the user defined function collides with a new standard function.
Most "modern" languages have very few built-in functions in the global namespace. Another example is Go. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe there is 0 function in global namespace in Rust. println! exists but that's a macro. In other words, the example I mentioned just never happens with these languages.
Not to mention the long list of junk you see in IDE when you type "array_".
I guess you haven't written much MATLAB.
It's never going to happen in a country where politicians try to convince people that college education == elitism, and a significant part of the population actually believes that
I once heard colleagues talking about ISO 26262 and went to look it up. Apparently I need to pay CHF 42 to figure out what's in this "industry standard".
Sometimes I don't know which is worse, Elsevier or ISO.
That's exactly who they are targeting, and you can be assured that there are organizations who would be willing to pay for this. Your dentist will be more than happy to pay Microsoft $40/month to manage their desktops.
Curious, do run into any network/IO performance issues? Last time I checked, networking is horrible, I mean `npm install ` would time out when it works on the host without issues, and this was a well known issue. Haven't touched WSL for a while because of this.
Anecdotally, my observation is that SWEs are the group of people who are the least likely to think of laptops as status symbols. People buy $1500 laptops because (they think) they work efficiently on those machines. Otherwise, people are very happy to use $300 Chromebooks or framework laptops as long as they get the job done. Many people put very little thoughts into which laptop they buy.
You probably are thinking about a different group of people.
I was amazed by the amount of ads on the site -- that's a lot. That's when I have uBlock origin and almost only ever see subtle text based ads occasionally.
Very few companies would be able to manage a gigantic project like Chromium.
I happen to be poking around the Chromium codebase the last few days. The size of the codebase itself is at the same level as all of our company's code. Something as important and critical as GPU rendering is only a small part of the entire project. You also have v8, ChromeOS, ANGLE etc to worry about, all requiring experts in those areas. Not to mention things like Widevine and other proprietary technology surrounding Chrome.
I know as a matter of fact that many teams'/companys' approach is "We'll develop and run our CI tests on Chrome only. If it breaks on Firefox or Safari, we'll fix it, but that's as much as what we care about." And I'll be honest, for many organizations, it's a good business and financial move.