> Steve McConnell's "Rapid Development" from 1994 - well before the Agile Manifesto!
> > To the vertical-market programmer, it's rapid prototyping using the latest version of Microsoft Visual Basic or Delphi.
Huh? Did you get the year wrong, or was he referring to a brand-new / not yet released / tool as a "standard" for some segment of his audience? AFAICR, Delphi was introduced in 1995, or at the very earliest, late 1994. Feels weird that he should mention it in a book published in 1994.
It isn’t financial instruments doing that - it’s people.
Be thankful that it allows this to happen somewhat transparently and peacefully, rather than at the hands of pinkertons, criminals, or the military - which is how historically it has happened.
Most American consumers who find themselves at the local TJs or Whole Foods should probably feel way, way worse about driving to the store than about little plastic spoons.
Also, we really, really need legislation to stop the ridiculousness of over-packaging. The other day I bought some case screws for my PC and they came in a goddamn "nice" foam-padded plastic case. That was completely unnecessary. They should have put the screws in a small cardboard box and mailed that out directly.
I'm going to punt on the first half, the second is emphatically true. Or the psychological effects could be desirable.
No one should recommend ceremonial magic and occult study, in my opinion. Anyone who 'should' be going down the rabbit hole can't be dissuaded.
But if you must, start with something like Prometheus Rising by Robert Anton Wilson. Don't just pull out the Goetia and start summoning demons. Reality may or may not be mutable, but our perception of it certainly is. Would you really pick that as a first experiment?
As soon as you realize that changing rasterization strategies alters the bounding box of character textures, and that a lot of UI positions are hardcoded, it makes sense.
The passage about following the contracts to the letter and thus being able to get out of those contracts with a bit of cleverness reminds me of a similar principle in stores about faeries -- that faeries will follow their bargains with mortals to the letter. In faerie stories, this is what makes deals with faeries so risky, especially with the more malevolent ones; you never know just how your words will be twisted against your intentions and desires.
I wonder how much of the to-the-letter aspect of demonic contracts borrows from the older European folk stories of faeries, or whether it is the opposite -- the to-the-letter aspect of deals with faeries being a medieval Christian projection upon those stories.
This article starts to get at an interesting controversy about the definition of value. Is the value of a project equal to the amount of labor time it saves over previously used methods? Or is it equal to the amount of labor time it took to create the project? I think most software devs would intuitively pick the former, and that is what the article sides with, but I think there is merit to the latter and people should at least consider it. The article presents an apparent contradiction (the author's side project was coded in a few hours and has arguably had more of a positive impact than their entire day job career's output) but that contradiction is resolved by the latter definition of value, the labor theory of value.
The labor theory of value explanation for this is straightforward. In general, LTV asserts that the value output of some work approximates the amount of work that ordinarily has to go into it, or more precisely, of the socially necessary labor time going into that work (ie, the time it would take an average worker to do it without slacking off). This is because if you wanted that work done and didn't care how it got done, the socially necessary labor time would be the real cost of doing it yourself or paying someone else to live to do it (before various market dynamics and other distorting factors - it is an idealize model). I.e., in an assembly line, the cost of a part is the cost of raw materials + the cost of the labor added to them. This seems straightforward for assembly line work, but is a little less intuitive when the actual work is about making other people's work more efficient, which a lot of software dev falls into. But if someone simply said to themselves "I need the functionality of mammoth.js", the core idea still applies - of being able to replace the worker, hire a generic software dev, and get comparable work (or at least, good enough work), for a similarly low amount of value. Another way to think of it is that mammoth.js might save a lot of people a lot of time, but getting some version of mammoth.js implemented is probably historically inevitable and has a fixed and much smaller cost to actually do.
How does this resolve the contradiction in the article? Well, mwilliamson's day job career labor output might possibly have saved less time of other people's work than mammoth.js. But their day job career labor output probably couldn't have been replaced in any way but by a similarly large amount of time and effort from other developer(s). Meanwhile, mammoth.js could be reimplemented in a similarly small amount of time by someone else, maybe taking a couple of tries to get it right. If mammoth.js hadn't been written at the time it was, maybe that would have happened.
This isn't to discount ingenuity or insight going into this side project, or the usefulness of something like mammoth.js being in the right place and time. But I think it is a more precise way to think about how much value and what kinds are being added to the world by larger or smaller amounts of effort. In other words, devs shouldn't feel bad about having worked hard on stuff that is less neatly labor-saving than a small widget, as long as that hard work turned out to be useful.
The union is only as big as necessary to hold its largest data member. The other data members are allocated in the same bytes as part of that largest member. The details of that allocation are implementation-defined but all non-static data members will have the same address (since C++14). It's undefined behavior to read from the member of the union that wasn't most recently written. Many compilers implement, as a non-standard language extension, the ability to read inactive members of a union.
What 6.5.2.3 simplifies is the use of unions of the type:
struct A{int type; DataA a;}
struct B{int type; DataB b;}
union U{A a;B b};
U u;
switch(u.type)...
Its not what is beeing used here.
std::variant is designed to deprecate all legitimate uses of union
"Development", (i.e. specifying, writing, testing and deploying software) can frequently be made agile.
But 90% of the time, it's pointless since the business isn't agile.
You have layers of management from the CEO through dept heads to unit leaders etc, and then you hit the actual devs/QAs/POs, etc... and agile starts here.
Windows is slowly losing configuration. From the very first versions you had complete control over fonts, colours, and sizes of UI elements, then starting with Win8 they removed that, and now in Win10 it's very hard to change something like the font for icons and the (horribly low contrast) taskbar button highlight colour.
It's still possible to force (most of) it to the good old MS Sans Serif and with no antialiasing, the way I like it, but it's getting harder with each new version.
Hey, thanks! I think I tried to poke around Github Explore a couple of times. It's still a disorganised pile of stuff but I guess at least it's a new disorganised pile of stuff, I'll check it out some more :-).
Yes, mostly because of the energy used in their creation. For example you have to reuse a cotton grocery bag 7100 times before you break even with plastic bags for carbon footprint.
Then you need to read it again. No one is making you make changes to your body. You are always free to go somewhere else.
Come on. If vaccines are ao offensive, why do you want to work for someone that only wants people that are vaccinated around them? Take some responsibility for your actions win life choices instead crying, “Woe is me!” No one owes you a job, nor do you owe any employer your labor. Walk if you don’t like it.
I've been using this for a while and am quite happy with the results. Although, I had to create my own customized profile for the best results.
The effect is esp. obvious when working on Word documents. Somehow fonts are not rendered "thick" enough in Word, and this app takes care of that.
Honestly, I wish MS would do something about blurred fonts in some of the not-so-old programs. Some parts of the Windows OS itself are not rendered correctly!!
>>Some or all EU countries have completely abandoned the practice.
Absolutely not true, glad you maybe live in a country where landfills are disappearing, but they will always exist in some form - even with burning where do you think the slag goes to? That's right, a normal landfill. Not everything can be burnt, and not everything can be recycled.
And definitely not "all" EU countries - Poland has normal landfills that take everything still, very few operational waste incenerators, and recycling is still unknown to a lot of people.
The way most people in Germany would solve this (we need a potty for some months) is buying it 2nd/3rd/4th hand. Is that not common where you live (I guess USA)?
nah don't do cover letters, but let a recruiter shop you around, they have backchannels into a lot of companies that otherwise don't really check their inbox
consider setting your linked in to "looking", which might cost money, but this gets the attention of even internal recruiters
Totally agree, i moved from a developing country (India) to a developed country (Germany) and the amount of waste me and my partner generate in the latter is around 10x.
In India, we would buy produce without any packaging, you would pay by weight. Whereas in Germany, fruits, vegetables and even fresh leaves come pre packed in plastic. I know Germany has better recycling but the amount of plastic is crazy. Quite the shock for us.
> > To the vertical-market programmer, it's rapid prototyping using the latest version of Microsoft Visual Basic or Delphi.
Huh? Did you get the year wrong, or was he referring to a brand-new / not yet released / tool as a "standard" for some segment of his audience? AFAICR, Delphi was introduced in 1995, or at the very earliest, late 1994. Feels weird that he should mention it in a book published in 1994.