Kids get infinite registers and no restrictions on stack ordering. Programmers are constrained to solving it with one register and restrictions on stack put operations.
I had enough colleagues unable to type exactly what they asked me into whatever search engine they preferred to accept your statement. If you don’t know how to use a search engine go ask for another job.
“Hey pancake, how do I run all tests via gradle?”
Open your browser, head to Google and type “run all tests in gradle”
Also, I constantly name files in the same directory the same thing except for case. In my ~/tmp directory I have unrelated foo.c (C source) and foo.C (C++ source).
.C came first. I don’t usually use it though; I usually use .cc or .cxx, but if I’m making some tiny test source, I often use .C. I’m strongly opposed to the .cpp extension because calling C++ “CPP” leads to confusion with the preexisting (before C++) use of the initialism to refer to the C preprocessor. There’s a reason why CPPFLAGS refers to preprocessor flags and CXXFLAGS refers to C++ flags.
Why does Linux do anything it does? Because a bunch of shortsighted nerds think it’s a good idea. For example, try to install software on another disk.
Symlink your desired location on the target disk to the place the system thinks the software should go. (In my case, /usr/local/games is a symlink to a different drive.)
As someone said you solution is to symlink or setup LVM volume groups for different mount points. Essentially, it’s all or nothing. You can’t just put a single program on a different disk without then taking all those files and manually symlinking them to the right place. It’s honestly one of the biggest Linux oversights.
XDG specifies the capital names, but to be nitpickingly technically precise, linux systems don’t do this. It mostly is done by the distribution maintainers, and the XDG specs. A base system does not usually have a notion of anything beyond your $HOME.
Try adding a user: sudo adduser basicuser. If you ls -al ~basicuser you will see it’s almost empty, just the .bashrc (or in my fedora, there’s some .mozilla crap in /etc/skel that also gets bootstrapped).
Well–well look. I already told you: I deal with the god damn customers so the engineers don’t have to. I have people skills; I am good at dealing with people. Can’t you understand that? What the hell is wrong with you people?
There are really few problems that are “impossible.” That is, if you count those customers/managers are interested in. All the rest is just “I’ll need 10 years, 230 million Dollars and a research team”
Because that will fail to detect a program that halts in X+1 time. The problem isn’t to detect if a program that halts halts, the problem is to generally create an algorithm that will guarantee that the analyzed program will always halt given an infinite time running on an infinite computer.
But you could also do a mean time analysis on specific tasks and have it cut off at a standard deviation or two (90-98% of task times covered), and have a checkbox or something for when the user expects longer times.
You could probably even make this adaptive, with a cutoff at 2x the standard time, and updating the median estimate after each run.
I was recently tasked with the traveling salesman problem on a project. My first pass was quick but produced sloppy inefficient results. Well boss didn’t like it so he had me go back at it again so it would be far more accurate. Well now it slogs through figuring out an optimal solution of several thousand points.
That’s not even close to solving the halting problem. FF doesn’t check if the program has been in its current state before. It literally just checks if 10 seconds have passed without JS emptying its event loop.
Right. There is no solution to the halting problem, that’s been proven. But you just showed you can very easily create a way of practically solving it. Just waiting for 10 seconds does it. That will catch every infinite loop while also having some false positives. And that will be fine in most applications.
My point is that even if a solution to the halting problem is impossible, there is often a very possible solution that will get you close enough for a real world scenario. And there are definitely more sophisticated methods of catching non-halting programs with fewer false positives.
For JavaScript apps, stopping them when they consume too much resources is definitely a good idea. But if you work on some project where it’s common to run computionally intensive tasks, it can be harder to detect non-halting.
There have been genuine efforts to do that. Obviously (well, for a very niche use of “obviously”) it’s not always possible, but detecting infinite loops isn’t like the uncertainty principle.
Just because it’s not possible on a Turing Machine doesn’t mean it’s impossible on a PC with finite memory. You just have to track all the memory that is available to the algorithm and once you detect a state you’ve seen already, you know it’s not halting ever. The detection algorithm will need an insane amount of memory though.
Edit: think about the amount of memory that would need. It’s crazy but theoretically possible. In real world use cases only if the algorithm you’re watching has access to a tiny amount of memory.
This. Very few problems are truly impossible to solve, they arem in fact, just wildly impractical to solve. So don’t try to tell the PM/client/coworker-with-a-‘brilliant’-idea it can’t be done, tell them what it’ll take to work out what it’ll take to do it. Either they go away, or you end up in charge of a project with an astronomical budget and no clearly defined deliverables.
I mean, now a days, I can upload the image into stable diffusion automatic1111 and click interrogate CLIP and then see if it outputs “bird” as a reverse promopt, but this comic WAS from 4 and a half years ago, so the programmer was right on the time-frame.
It always depends on which existing tools you have access to. Go back some more years and there is no GPS. Detecting the bird will be the easier problem then.
This is completely unrelated to the meme at hand, but the title just reminded me that for a while, Merriam-Webster mistakenly included the word “Dord” to mean density - because an editor misread the entry for “D or d” as an abbreviation of density.
Why do you have a project manager discussing technical solutions? That’s kind of… very wrong. Most PMs nowadays have a just a slightly better technical background than a secretary…
A project manager has responsibility for delivery of a project but they typically lack domain specific knowledge. As a result they can't directly deliver something, merely ask subject matter experts for advice and facilitate a team to deliver.
Most PM's cope with the stress of this position poorly.
This cartoon is an example of micro management (a common coping mechanisim), the manager has involved themselves in the low level decisions because that gives a sense of control. If a technical team then tell them its a bad decison the team are effectively attacking their coping mechanisim.
The solution isn't to tell them their technical idea is terrible, when you've fallen down this rabbit hole you have to treat the PM as a stakeholder. They are someone you have to manage, so a common solution is to give them confidence there is a path to delivery, a way to track and understand it.
Best practice is to clearly state that PM here is not competent for its job, either he finds a solution himself (e.g. he manages expectations of clients without admitting he fucked up) or he has to be replaced.
This kind of situation is very dangerous. PM shouldn’t take similar decisions, nor promising anything
Management normally defines ways to track and judge itself, these are typically called Key Performance Indicators.
KPI's are normally things like contract value growth, new contracts signed, profit margin, etc..
So if the project manager is meeting or exceeding their KPI's and you walk up to their boss telling them the PM is failing as basic job functions, the boss won't care.
This is because the boss might have set the KPI's or the boss might also be judged on them. In either situation its to the bosses advantage to ignore you.
The boss will only care if there is a KPI you can demonstrate the PM failing to meet.
Every person/group will have various incentives and motivations. To affect change you have to understand what they are.
Not even a pure mckinsey type of company value kpis over stakeholders’ feedbacks. If a company is purely kpi driven, it is a bad company, as kpi cannot catch everything, but have limited and specific scope. Your managers should go back to their MBAs, and revise their stakeholder management skills. If a manager get a feedback that one of their team members is jeopardizing a project and the relationship with clients due to taking responsibilities and tasks for which they have no competency, it is extremely bad. In this case is even proved by the fact that the company must spend resources lowering the clients expectations. Managers should absolutely act. If this doesn’t happen, the managerial side of your company is pretty broken
Yes the problem is that they are management. You can say they are shitty managers all you want, but the only result you’ll get is that they will fire you.
And if you convince the project manager that it won’t work by telling them all the reasons why they come back a few days or weeks later asking why it won’t work.
It’s because of big pay, highly mobile employees, hiding the real role of the HR and this false sense of security compared to the rest of the workplaces despite all these lay-offs from the big companies. Also, whenever a unionizing attempt happens, the companies go into crackdown mode and have their multitude of ways to either fire you with a bogus reason, remove your post citing “restructuring” or pulling you on a dead career track and demonize you in front of your colleagues with the usual “we care about our employees and everything can already be resolved through HR” speech. And moreover, many of these issues have a direct cause the Work Laws of the respective countries
Unions only make sense when you are easily replaceable as a worker so you don’t have any barganing power on your own. As an individual IT worker you can usually tell your boss to fuck off if things get bad and just look for a new better job…
programmer_humor
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.