So padding a day of the month with a 0 or not changes the result by 1 hour. Every browser does the same so I assume this is a legacy thing. It’s supposed to be padded but any sane language would throw an exception if it was malformed. Not JavaScript.
Seriously, i just googled how much energy would be needed to put 1Kg in LEO. Ofc there’s a StakOverflow to it asking the same question and none of 4 answers answer the question and one is like “This seems like a complicated way of doing it. Instead of asking the minimum energy…”.
They’re not required here. You just plop your child in your regular car with no changes whilst they’re learning. It’s insane. I bought a magnetic sign to warn people though, because that seems nuts to me.
Reminds me of the woman that got a fine for “driving in a bus lane” here in the UK. When she looked at the attached image on the fine it was of a woman walking in the street of a town she’d never been to. On that woman’s jumper was lettering that closely resembled her plates.
Made me think I could attach a sheet of card with the plate details of some arsehole I disliked, ride a bicycle down the bus lane and see if they start complaining about being fined. 😅
No, actually C#'s answer should be: “What Java said - hold on, what Python said sounds good too, and C++'s stuff is pretty cool too - let’s go with all of the above.”
C#, or as I like to call it “the Borg of programming languages”.
I got my first software developer role last year and it was the first time I’d written C#, I was more TypeScript. Now we use both but I must say I really like C# now that I’m used to it.
I think most programmers would like C# if they spent time with it. It is getting a bit complex because the joke about it over borrowing from other languages is on the money. It is a nice language though and pretty damn fast these days all things considered.
There’s too much MS in the language and runtime for me. The fact that it gives my Linux programs DLL files and the fact that by default the SDK phones home makes me run away in horror from not only writing it but also running other projects written in it.
The biggest selling point about functional languages for me is the type system, mainly algebraic/union types (which imo Scala does the best), pattern matching (and imo Rust does this best), and the incredible type inference, but also all the functional features. But I think the best part about F# specifically comparing it to C# is the removal of a shit ton of the boilerplate. Plus data is immutable by default, always a nice touch.
For F#, the special types may not be super relevant when interacting with C# libraries, but in general you can do everything in F# that you can do in C#, including all the OOP. It’s just an added bonus that you basically get enums on steroids and pattern matching.
I find that writing in F#, even if I write basically the same code I would in C#, speeds up my design/programming a TON and makes it significantly more maintainable and easy to navigate. There’s a lot less clutter and you don’t have to worry about the layers upon layers of repetitive boilerplate.
The only downside IMO is that F# can have some terrible error messages. And of course, you have to learn F# syntax which can be a small pain if you’ve never used ML or Haskell (especially when it comes to function call syntax). But if you’re mainly interfacing with C# libraries then it’s no big deal. I started making an application only utilising C# libraries (mainly DB stuff) the same day I started using F# and it went relatively smoothly, although probably because Rust is the main language I used then.
This resource might help, although I can’t say it’s enough to completely learn the language: fsharp.org/learn/
Rust isn’t really OOP like C#, Java or C++ - it has structs with functions that you could consider an “object” but there is no inheritance. Instead Rust uses traits which are a little bit like interfaces in some languages.
The way the kernel is using Rust at the moment is to produce safe bindings for modules to be written in Rust, i.e. you can create a module in Rust source which will be correctly loaded up, the code is safe by default and will have access to kernel services via bindings. I expect over time that more of the kernel will become Rust, but the biggest impediment right now is Rust relies on LLVM and LLVM only supports a subset of targets that a kernel could potentially support with another compiler like gcc.
Having a thorough process and an engineer approach in software development is also pretty handy. There weren’t many bugs in the AGC. Yet it was programmed mostly in assembly and people had no trouble trusting it with their life.
This is dangerous. The object might not have the crack() method, and this bloats the compiled size by a lot if you use it with different types. There's also no reason I can see to use concepts here. The saner way would probably be to use inheritance and objects to mimic Java interfaces.
programmer_humor
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.