Yeah that is true. Not all IDEs support that though.

Doesn’t seem that bad to me, but I’m not a junior, or in the US.

TL;DR: Intellisense works best if you write bottom-up (true) and it means you have to remember less stuff (also true), therefore it makes you write worse code (very doubtful).

So I don’t think IntelliSense is helping us become better programmers. The real objective is for us to become faster programmers, which also means that it’s cheapening our labor.

This doesn’t make any sense though.

1. People don’t have unlimited time. Writing high quality code takes time and wasting it remembering or typing stuff that Intellisense can take care of means I have less time for refactoring etc. Also one of the really useful things about Intellisense is that it enables better refactoring tools!

2. It doesn’t make you dumber to use tool assistance. It just means you get less practice in doing the thing that the tool helps you with. Does that matter? Of course not! Does it matter that I can’t remember how to do long division because I always use a calculator? Absolutely not. Similarly it doesn’t matter that I can’t remember off the top of my head which languages use starts_with, HasPrefix, startswith, etc. doesn’t matter at all if Intellisense can easily tell me.

3. You don’t have to use the Intellisense suggestions. Just press escape. It’s very easy.

4. It’s very well known that making something easier to do increases demand for it.

Yeah I agree.

In my experience taking an inefficient format and copping out by saying “we can just compress it” is always rubbish. Compression tends to be slow, rules out sparse reads, is awkward to deal with remotely, and you generally always end up with the inefficient decompressed data in the end anyway, whether in temporarily decompressed files or in memory.

I worked in a company where they went against my recommendation not to use JSON for a memory profiler output. We ended up with 10 GB JSON files, even compressed they were super annoying.

We switched to SQLite in the end which was far superior.

Hmm I think just using SQLite or DuckDB with normalised data would probably get you 99% of the way there…

If I’m understanding you correctly, you can create a branch to mark where you are git branch tmp then abort the rebase. Switch to tmp get the history like you wanted, then switch back. Finally do a git rebase -i again, but immediately git reset --hard tmp. Now you have the resolved commits you want, and can delete any you don’t want to do again with git --edit-todo.

Maybe.

Impossible to say without more details. Did you try debugging it? See if the CSS file can load? Check the dev console?

You mean like forcing people to use email to submit pull requests to your self-hosted git repos?

I think he meant “you” as in there person running the project, not a contributor.

But… it’s still stupid because GitHub doesn’t force a workflow on you. Unless he means “have an issue tracker” and “use CI” are a workflow. You don’t even need to use merge requests if you don’t want (but I have no idea why anyone would give up something that works so well).

The majority of the post comes across as someone who just doesn’t like the forge sites and aside from the trust aspect, then spent a bunch of effort trying to create associations and limitations between things that don’t exist.

Definitely.

The junior devs I’ve worked with don’t just send me raw ChatGPT output.

It’s not hard and fast but:

• API is the actual interface for the functions, not the implementation. It’s possible for one API to be implemented by more than one library.
• Library is a bunch of code provided together. It might have more specific meaning depending on the language.
• A package is something you can install. It’s pretty much synonymous to library since most packages contain one library.
• A framework is just a library that dictates a lot about how your app works.

Apart from API they don’t really have strict definitions so they’ll be used interchangeably and differently depending on the language.

Ah yeah I don’t think that existed last time I used it.

Yeah that’s a great option too. Not free though (although the pricing is very reasonable IMO). I think if you’re this much of a beginner it doesn’t make sense to pay for Pycharm.

Yeah others have pointer out the error, but I want to really recommend using VSCode with the Python extension and static types. It will make finding these errors super easy because it adds a red underline exactly where the problem is.

Static types means:

def splitter(expression: str) -> tuple[str, str, str]:
...
def calculate(x: str, y: str, z: str) -> str:

Eh they had their chance to fix the moderation issues. It’s been a good run but I think this is the beginning of the end.

Hopefully whatever replaces them won’t make the same mistakes.

Not sure about freelance, but for a salary in my experience, answer some recruiter spam on LinkedIn. I always thought they’d be crap since they are spammy… But after using some I’ve totally changed my mind. At least in my industry (silicon verification):

• Companies use them.
• You get a foot in the door & can bypass all the HR crap.
• They know all of the relevant companies. I learnt about my current company from the recruiter.
• They give you some hints about the interview process.
• They do all of the chasing up for you.

Also, they get a big payoff if you get a job, so their interests are more or less aligned with yours. The only slight difference is that they just want you to get any job, so they might push you to a job you don’t really want. But it’s minor.

Basically you get a lot of benefits for using them and you aren’t paying the cost - the company is. They won’t pay that cost to you if you don’t use a recruiter and save them cash, so there’s no real reason not to use a recruiter.

It may be very different for less niche sectors; I don’t know.

Sometimes I prefer video… But usually not.

E.g. this channel has fantastic videos: https://youtube.com/@therustybits

So glad they made the sane move and fixed std::env::home_dir(). The previous situation of having it deprecated due to fairly insignificant reasons, while recommending an abandoned crate instead was just silly.

Well COBOL hasn’t completely gone away… I don’t think anyone expects C to become completely extinct; just very legacy.

D missed its chance. Zig is clearly going to be the successor to C, for people who don’t want to use Rust.

Yes, but be warned, formal software verification is proper hardcore. Complicated computer science theories, scant documentations - much of which assumes you have a PhD in the field, and in my experience it’s quite a leaky abstraction. You’ll end up needing to know a lot about the actual implementation of Lean to figure out why some things work and others don’t, in a way that you don’t need to in “normal” languages.

It’s quite satisfying when it works though. Like a puzzle.

I highly recommend this fun “game”: https://adam.math.hhu.de/#/g/leanprover-community/nng4