If I was at any moment perfectly aware of every minute detail of every programming related topic, and could also apply it perfectly, I honestly think I’d get incredibly stressed and depressed. Stressed from all the billions of projects that I could improve, and would kinda feel the obligation to improve. And depressed because the whole reason I like programming is the learning part. Almost every project I start will end at the point where I learnt the most significant new stuff and it comes down to doing things that I know how to do. It’d ruin my primary hobby (and job) for me, which probably wouldn’t result in me being very happy.
Bro needs to go big. Why not all electronics and electronic systems in general? As it is he could still be “caught with his pants down” by another speculative execution bug.
I’m used to non-software managers thinking knowing a language is knowing how to make software systems, but other programmers? It’s like saying if you know every language now you’re a novelist. Knowing the language is just a basic necessary fundamental from which you can start to learn how to design and create software.
No, the flip side of this wish is your knowledge is frozen in time to when you make the wish and can never be updated. You gradually become more and more outdated as you fail to grasp even the simplest of changes to all languages in current usage.
Oh no, does this include all hypothetical alternate interpretations of the same code? So, you just look at the screen and go “yep, it definitely could mean something”?
Why limit yourself like that? Just say “All languages”. Depending on how liberally you interpret the word “language”, you know know just about everything.
Oh you don’t want to know exactly how many pubes your grandmother shed in her lifetime? You don’t care to know what the sewage of tasted like in London on Sunday, the 16th of July 1882? You don’t burn with desire to learn what it feels like to get your viscera torn out by a hungry lion?
I dunno. You’d know exactly what it looks and smells like too, and what it’d feel like on your tongue. Depends on how vivid your imagination is.
I can’t visualise things, but when people ask me to “visualise an apple” I can feel the waxy exterior, the crispness (or gumminess of an old apple), the slightly floral scent before you bite into it, what it sounds like, etc.
Can’t fucking visualise it to save my life though.
I can imagine sensation if I want, but as a ‘for instance,’ I know I don’t like some foods because of certain sensations, but don’t have to perceive them when I remember why. I can’t imagine that most people aren’t the same, or we’d have a lot more people gagging randomly as they walk around. Sure, some people will be slightly perturbed if you mention certain things, like fecal matter, horrible farts, the feeling of biting down on aluminum… but those perturbations pass in moments.
Interesting! There’s a particular type of fabric I cannot stand, and every time I think of it I get the sensation of touching it. Doing my best to not fling my phone away.
My old man told me he took one programming language in college and it was APL. Having looked at APL since becoming a software dev myself, I can understand why he hated it.
<span style="color:#323232;"> MODE UNIVERSE = [upb OF class universe, upb OF class universe]BOOL; STRUCT( INT upb, BOOL lifeless, alive, PROC(REF UNIVERSE)VOID init, PROC(REF UNIVERSE)STRING repr, PROC(REF UNIVERSE, INT, INT)VOID insert glider, PROC(REF UNIVERSE)VOID next ) class universe = ( # upb = # 50, # lifeless = # FALSE, # alive = # TRUE, # PROC init = # (REF UNIVERSE self)VOID: FOR row index FROM LWB self TO UPB self DO init row(self[row index, ]) OD, # PROC repr = # (REF UNIVERSE self)STRING:( FORMAT cell = $b("[]", " ")$, horizon = $"+"n(UPB self)("--")"+"l$; FILE outf; STRING out; associate(outf, out); putf(outf, (horizon, $"|"n(UPB self)(f(cell))"|"l$, self, horizon)); close(outf); out ), # PROC insert glider = # (REF UNIVERSE self, INT row, col)VOID:( self[row-2, col+1] := TRUE; self[row-1, col+2] := TRUE; self[row, col:col+2] := (TRUE, TRUE, TRUE ) ), # PROC next = # (REF UNIVERSE self)VOID:( [0:2, LWB self-1:UPB self+1]BOOL window; # init row(window[LWB window, ]); window[LWB self, 2 LWB window] := window[LWB self, 2 UPB window] := window[UPB window, 2 LWB window] := window[UPB window, 2 UPB window] := lifeless OF class universe; window[LWB self, LWB self:UPB self] := self[LWB self, ]; FOR row FROM LWB self TO UPB self DO REF []BOOL next row = window[(row+1) MOD 3, ]; IF row NE UPB self THEN next row[LWB self:UPB self] := self[row+1, ] ELSE init row(next row) FI; FOR col FROM LWB self TO UPB self DO INT live := 0; FOR row FROM row-1 TO row+1 DO REF[]BOOL window row = window[row MOD 3, ]; FOR col FROM col-1 TO col+1 DO IF window row[col] THEN live +:= 1 FI OD OD; self[row, col] := IF window[row MOD 3, col] THEN live -:= live = 3 FI OD OD ) );
</span>
My gods. I think this just gave me flashbacks to this week.
I was recently battling node’s import/require shenanigans trying to figure out how to import a typescript module in my basic program. I feel this so hard.
I walked away utterly hating the language and its ecosystem. Utterly defeated, I gave up.
I know its a joke, but cutting PFF power is never a good idea. It makes any kind of forensics a lot harder, and its probably not going to help anyway. You should isolate the computer from the network, and then call a professional.
However, putting the computer to sleep/hibernate it may help, just so I.e ransomware can’t continue encrypting, but maybe still has keys in memory, if you’re lucky. This is only my theory, though, not sire what are the best practices.
programmer_humor
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.