|
Zlodo posted:yeah your screen looks better when it's off the #1 reason matte screens were better is that this joke wouldnt exist if everything was matte
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 19:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:18 |
|
|
uptime isn't important
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 19:34
|
|
|
Perplx posted:uptime isn't important forwarding this to upper management for review
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 19:35
|
|
|
rotor posted:the #1 reason matte screens were better is that this joke wouldnt exist if everything was matte you could always move to australia
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 19:36
|
|
|
Perplx posted:uptime isn't important burn the heretic
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 19:37
|
|
|
rotor posted:is it unpopular to say that matte screens were better? if so: matte screens were better. they are good if you have a lot of light behind you and don’t mind the huge drop in contrast
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 20:22
|
|
|
Java existing on billions of devices, most of which are in landfills now, is not a thing worth bragging about
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 20:24
|
|
|
java is good
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 20:27
|
|
|
PokeJoe posted:java is good c# is good, java is fine
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 20:29
|
|
|
whatever you write that pays your rent is fine and doesnt matter
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:01
|
|
|
Share Bear posted:whatever you write that pays your rent is fine and doesnt matter well, there we have the ultimate unpopular opinion. in that it is absolutely untrue. if your code is currently actively blowing up children, and that is what determines having a roof over your head, come sleep on my couch instead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:29
|
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:well, there we have the ultimate unpopular opinion. in that it is absolutely untrue. if your code is currently actively blowing up children, and that is what determines having a roof over your head, come sleep on my couch instead. they meant what language/paradigm, not what purpose/application. when read as intended it's absolutely correct
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
oh, sorry, im dumb (and read no context)
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:41
|
|
|
scrum isn't bad per-se, but all the wanking around roles and ceremonies is just dumb and ignores the real point of it: to avoid having to commit to anything solid and do anything resembling planning by just shouting "agile!" at people
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:42
|
|
|
a lot of problems can, in fact be solved by throwing resources at them
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:47
|
|
|
most problems in fact, since 90% of them were probably caused by lack of resources in the first place
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:52
|
|
|
Powerful Two-Hander posted:a lot of problems can, in fact be solved by throwing resources at them
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:18
|
|
|
Powerful Two-Hander posted:scrum isn't bad per-se, but all the wanking around roles and ceremonies is just dumb and ignores the real point of it: to avoid having to commit to anything solid and do anything resembling planning by just shouting "agile!" at people are you doing stuff, what stuff? do you need help with stuff? here is the stuff to do, pick it up when you're done with your current stuff. here is the stuff we did, how did we do? this is cutting edge thought, everything else is icing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:26
|
|
|
sprints and points and so forth are important as predictive models of how much a team can get done in a given timespan and while of course agile can be done poorly and in fact frequently is, its a good framework to develop workflows on top of.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 23:01
|
|
|
it's easier and more worth your while to scale up by changing the product definition to line up with things that scale well according to theory than it is hiring and doing good distributed system engineering with modern systems to scale any product up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 23:27
|
|
|
MononcQc posted:it's easier and more worth your while to scale up by changing the product definition to line up with things that scale well according to theory than it is hiring and doing good distributed system engineering with modern systems to scale any product up. that "we don't do this because it's easy, we do it because we thought it would be easy" pinboard tweet
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 23:34
|
|
|
ai upscaled or colorized images and videos look completely unconvincing and tacky
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 03:49
|
|
|
Programming is actually pretty easy it's managing a software development project which is hard
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 08:28
|
|
|
there can be more than one hard thing
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 08:31
|
|
|
ellie, you're up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 08:31
|
|
|
ticket queues are better for managing your workflow than boards
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 09:40
|
|
|
systems are allowed to have unreliability
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 10:48
|
|
|
Perplx posted:uptime isn't important this is true, service availability matters, uptime is unimportant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 11:26
|
|
|
Achmed Jones posted:they meant what language/paradigm, not what purpose/application. when read as intended it's absolutely correct cool thank you for the assist
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 15:41
|
|
|
object oriented programming (the java/c# style) is a bad paradigm. it requires too much ceremony to accomplish simple tasks and the alleged benefits don't manifest in larger systems.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 20:19
|
|
|
"Object oriented programming is the roman numerals of computer science" is my all time favorite programming quote
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 20:37
|
|
|
oop is a pretty good way to model GUI elements, and also hardware drivers if you throw out oop, does that mean throwing out classes/structs? because lol @ that Poopernickel fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Nov 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 20:55
|
|
|
Poopernickel posted:oop is a pretty good way to model GUI elements, and also hardware drivers classes yes, structs no. it means that instead of having a class which both contains data as well as operations on that data, you have data structures that contain data, and you have functions that operate on data, and those are two separate things that don't have to be intrinsically linked
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2021 00:21
|
|
|
Why is this:code:code:It just leads to a bunch of smurf naming, and adds no value other than coolpoints for rolling your own class-calling convention Poopernickel fucked around with this message at 02:05 on Nov 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2021 02:03
|
|
|
Poopernickel posted:Why is this: You don’t want to let a foo bump itself. You have to show it how to bump.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2021 03:07
|
|
|
SporkOfTruth posted:as a very dumb EE/data clown, how exactly would one do this this guide looks pretty good and thorough: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/setup/environment
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2021 03:32
|
|
|
it's perfectly fine to still be on your parents' cellphone family plan at age 29
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2021 08:03
|
|
|
Poopernickel posted:Why is this: It's not about notation, it's about how you organize the code. Sometimes you may prefer to implement a system that works with a bunch of objects in its own place, rather than it's implementation being spread across all these classes
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2021 08:52
|
|
|
Poopernickel posted:Why is this: cant do datatype generic functions with oop!
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2021 10:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:18 |
|
|
by which i mean structural polymorphism
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2021 10:41
|
|