tomnj

This is not correct. Non NYC residents with NYS source income do not pay NYC (resident) tax, But they do pay NYS tax.

See https://www1.nyc.gov/site/finance/taxes/personal-income-tax-...

I’m often disappointed by how disrespectful people can be in programming discussions. It’s one thing to discuss tradeoffs but ridiculing peoples’ choices or speaking in absolutes is not helpful. There’s no One True Way to program.

huge amount of pent up demand for senior developers

But is leetcode really the way to find them?

You can work hard at things other than leetcode though, like actual jobs, personal projects, or learning tech in your field (web frameworks, programming languages, whatever).

And C is still king in many domains, eg embedded development.

There are plenty of reasons to still learn C even if better alternatives exist for most new projects. There’s so much important software out there in C (and C++), for example the Linux kernel.

Haskell and compilers at the same time! Following Appel’s awesome Modern Compiler Implementation in ML: https://github.com/tdp2110/HaskellTiger

Being in a competitive job market

Are we in a competitive job market still? For whom?

Allow me to rephrase then: while the overall population density of the US is low, we have some pretty large dense areas, including Southern California and the northeast megalopolis

One other factor in the US favor, it’s extremely low population density

laughs in jersey

Thumbs up. Respect

I’m 100% not making that point, nor do I believe it

Absolutely, but to say medical staff can’t get or spread flu is false

Anyone can get the flu, even those with flu shots

You don’t need sfinae to get Turing completeness of templates. Template specialization (a crude form of pattern matching) is the main driver for Turing completeness. For example, here’s a toy project to implement a subset of scheme lisp in templates which needs no sfinae: https://github.com/tdp2110/TmpLisp

I haven’t understand the details, but supposedly Java generics are also Turing complete: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1605.05274.pdf

Regarding laptops, I interviewed once in person in nyc and once in Montreal a few years back: only one (in nyc) brought a laptop for me to use

Edit: only one interviewer, that is

Does something about this sound wrong to googlers?

I greatly enjoy the absurdity of this: Xoogler rejected own packet (while at msft, presumably)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22345234

Not scapegoating anything, nor do I think it’s reasonable to expect interviews are not stressful.

Maybe FAANG should institute random DS&A tests for all employees and fire underperformers as potential false positives. /s

Don’t forget 4) find the optimal solution with very few hints and write that too.

Leetcode style systems are a lot of fun for people.

That’s not true for everyone, especially in such high stress situations as an interview. I like crosswords, but I wouldn’t want to do them in front of someone judging me for a job in 45 min while thinking aloud.

Here’s an Xoogler talking about how he was given his own hiring packet to review (without knowing it was his) and rejected it: https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=r8RxkpUvxK0&t...

Can also confirm from my own experience 3 years ago

At least in the case of overflow, the article mentions a few arguments:

“”” This direction was motivated by:

Performance concerns, whereby defining the behavior prevents optimizers from assuming that overflow never occurs; Implementation leeway for tools such as sanitizers; Data from Google suggesting that over 90% of all overflow is a bug, and defining wrapping behavior would not have solved the bug. “””

Also mentioned in godfather part 2: https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&t=4m26s&v=L6DkV...

It’s heard in Godfather part 2, though: https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&t=1m&v=L6DkVsss...

That’s correct, and it’s quoted in JF’s paper linked above: “ The main change between [P0907r0] and the subsequent revision is to maintain undefined behavior when signed integer overflow occurs, instead of defining wrapping behavior.”

Out of curiosity, why wouldn’t that be a taxable perk? (Not that I think tax codes make any sense)