While that may be true, this is still likely an automated response built by a script that found some keywords on your profile. I still get the occasional proposition for RPG work, and I haven't touched an AS/400 in over a 20 years which my profile reflects. I haven't even touched my profile in years. But the script doesn't care about that. That's for the HR rep to filter out later if you respond.
Why you are no doubt correct; as someone who’s had to support a BarTender based automated print system in a manufacturing company, this skillet need doesn’t surprise me at all and is part of why the software gave me a drinking problem.
So you’re saying it would help to have both a bartender, and a bartender specialist on the team. Seems like we might be doing the bot a disservice here
I’m still getting weekly emails (and who knows how many linked in messages) trying to recruit me over a profile I haven’t updated in a decade…aka 2 years after I entered the industry
One of these days, I’m going to set up my AI assistant to respond. Who knows, with an even playing field maybe some of them will be worthwhile
Southern Italy is better at pizza, we all agree atelier all that’s where pizza comes from. Florence is not in the south however, you might have had a good pizza, you can eat very good pizza everywhere in Italy. That said general consensus is Naples is where you want to go for the good good shit.
Are they based out of the PNW? Now that I think about it, I may actually have interviewed with them at one point.
ETA: Yeah, pretty sure it was them, they’re PT and have a 425 DID for sales, and the company name is wholly unrelated to the product. Had forgotten about them entirely, and would have had the same reaction as OP to getting that email now.
And it probably is the sw product the email was referencing, since Bartender is capitalized.
I’m not a developer of any ends, but I would love to join you lot in getting drunk, I have some experience with computers and understand very basic terms, so there won’t be any issues here
And a lot more bug prone. I’m just explaining the OP because people didn’t get it. I’m not saying dynamic languages are bad. I’m saying they have different trade-offs.
I have a feeling you are misunderstanding what is meant by “theorems for free” here. For example, one theorem that is proven by all safe Rust programs is that they don’t have data races. That should always be a requirement for functional software. This is a more pragmatic type of automatic theorem proving that doesn’t require a direct proof from the code author. The compiler does the proof for you. Otherwise the theorem would not be “free” as stated in OP.
Industry will choose not to verify that your function does not produce NullPointerException wasting hours of the client’s work, because in order to do that they would have to have actual requirements for software developers, and in order to do that they would have to 1 - have the managers be actually technically literate, and 2 - pay the developers properly That’s it. That’s the theorems. The “formal verification” we’re talking about here are those of the likes of “this value is a damn integer”, or as you could interpret it “your code is not stupidly broken”.
To be clear, I’m not writing this big comment for you, I know you’re trolling or whatever you’re into, I’m writing this to inform other readers. ✌🏻
Yes, that’s why we use typing, to get better working code more easily. That’s why I use type annotation and enforced checkers in Python. It makes it so much easier and quicker to create good systems of any significance.
I may just be an old country lawyer PHP developer… but don’t most dynamic languages also support static type checking and general analysis at this point?
Yes if you use type annotations. Languages like Python and Typescript end up resorting to “Any” types a lot of the time, which breaks any kind of theorem proving you might have otherwise benefited from.
Java developers aren’t allowed to not know better by this point. If they think skipping types is somehow ideologically purer, keep hitting with that stick until you hit deckplate.
Yes but no. Modern PHP lets you put types in function signatures and it will then attempt to convert your inputs to those types at runtime.
JS/TS and Python don’t do this. They have optional type annotations that’s treated as syntactic sugar. You can use static checkers against this but if you get an error like “expected string got int” you can still run the code. It won’t behave any differently because you have annotations.
Though even statically-typed languages can need to check types sometimes; parsing runtime data for instance. I can see how you’d do that with pure statics, but it’d just be shifting the work (e.g. if token == QUOTE: proc.call(read_str(bytes, len))). It’d be cool to see a counter example that isn’t unreadable gibberish, however.
Op here back from the dead. This is in fact not a stab at dynamically typed languages, or at least not only: statically typed languages such as Java also support this kind of construct. In fact, one could develop a technically type safe programming language where an instanceof construct has sound semantics.
What instanceof breaks is something called polymorphic parametricity, i.e. the fact that generic functions don’t know anything specific about the types they are generic over. This is the fundamental condition for what in the community is dubbed “theorems for free”, that is, naturality of generic functions between generic types.
Only work 3 days per week and very short shifts. Your day ends exactly when you clock out. There is no work to bring home, or ruminate about. What’s not to love?
No waking up in the middle of the of the night panicked, rushing to your work laptop, getting on the vpn, greping logs, and realizing it was all a dream and that never happened.
programmer_humor
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.