way worse if it were green

thats a man of integrity

But what would you have gotten if you won?

It works, keep it :D

Respect

underrated comment bhahaha

🤣

What would Linus do? WWLD?

hahaha, gottem good

Programmers are also humans, has a video on Sr. rust dev. the dev also has blue hair.🤣🤣 ukposts.info/have/v-deo/jHeXhatnmYeFrJc.html

🤣🤣🤣

can't be one. He's not in a fur suit

It's part of the new Netflix uniform requirements

@@_Lumiere_Either that or he has to personally go to Skid Row and greenlight a series pitched by a homeless drug addict.

😂😂😂😂😂

Arc

Trying so hard to pretend that he is not DrDisrespect

@@CallMeMSL Arc

I find it really jarring for some reason. I can't look at it too long, or I find it disturbing.

​@@yeetdeetsit is, maybe its just the autism speaking xD

Rust may make iron red but it makes programmers blue.

He was like "hold my beer"

primeagen isn't being treated by a therapist. the therapist is being treated by primaeagean

@@private_account407 thats not how this meme works but ok

Also for all level of engineers. If you are not clear about the domain of a specific functions. Copy & Paste that function for your own usage with modification and clear out all the unrelated stuff is totally fine, it doesn't violate the DRY principle. Don't try to reuse everything, please. I have a hard hard hard time to watch people are arguing about DRY and Copy&Paste

Yeah, i have stopped myself a many times.... but a reminder is always helpful

YAGNI! You ain't gonna need it :-)

Software developers like to be clever. Once your cleverness gets you in trouble a few times you'll learn to prioritize simplicity and maintainability.

It's easier to write 5 lines of code 3 times than to write 50 lines of code to abstract those 5 lines and then share those 50 as a dependency in 3 projects that has to be maintained and documented for 20 years

Yes! Someone built a cheat sheet thing for... mostly another team. I haven't used it. I'm not sure who has used it and I'm not sure who has kept the info in there updated, if they ever did. He's no longer with the company, so now it's with another team who is just maintaining it.

Then the communist co-worker says "i don't believe in private property" 😂

And then the person who wrote/owns it leaves the company

This is why it's bad to have too nice a keyboard

That's why the best programmers are lazy by default. We spend the extra effort to make a routine atomic, so we can make it into a module. That way we can just pull it in instead of having to write the whole darn thing again.

I have learned that WET = Write Everything Twice; The heuristic being that you need at least three instances in order for an abstraction to be merited. It's not a perfect heuristic, but it's worth to keep in mind.

All in all, he f**ked up in the best way possible

Thats not some random engineer at Google, he is one of the oldest kernel developers, a very known guy (speaks at conferences, part of Linux advisories boards, etc), and did most of the work for ftrace framework (IIRC). Which makes this thing kind of funny and awkward.

Steven is not some random Google engineer. By Steven's own words; "tl;dr; Google had very little to do with the email thread. I didn't copy a function that I didn't understand but it was overkill for my use case which is why Linus said I didn't understand it. Linus was having a bad week when a bug report came in on my code." There's a longer comment on TheRegister explaining everything from his start as a kernel developer, building file systems, to the issue at hand and a more in-depth explanation of what happened.

Why lie?

​@@deallocWeird to take Steven's words at face value while not taking Linus's

The two requirements for a BDFL.

God bless Linus.

Also made git

on his way to buy programming socks, software development is an equipment sport

Don't let your memes be dreams. Train your own language model on aggro Linus emails.

A prime reactor, even

​@@joestevenson5568prime reactor can not be even unless it's a 2

@@papsanlysenko5232A prime reactor, odd

@@joestevenson5568 nuclear reactor

speaking of wrappers huh

i just wouldn't understand engineering (real engineering)

*Perkele*

Finland mentioned, torilla tavataan!

The Swedes knew what they were talking about when they coined the term "Management by Perkele" to describe Finnish managers 😄 I suppose Linus managed to find just about the only niche where that style KINDA works. Anywhere else it's only harmful to everyone involved 😅

Cmake 🤣

@@freasses ffs no. literally the definition of overcomplicating things

A significant portion of all computing is just generating and parsing json

@@oblivion_2852 That is trully horrifying. Probably in the same order of magnitude of power usage compared to crypto mining

That was anything but mature from Linus lol. He ranted in his face for several paragraphs. He could have shut him down in 10 sentences tops and still done it via direct confrontation. Basically Linus went beyond shutting him down and bullied/intimidated him, as you can see from the other person's meek reply that Prime skipped over. Classic Linus, still toxic.

@@Blaisem Read the whole thread, not what prime is just reacting to, understand the genesis of that conversation and you'll see why I came to that conclusion. Open source projects are hectic and repeated pull requests can be annoying, especially if they have the same issues re-occurring .

I hope he finds someone just like him

greg is there lol

Looking at the Linux community today, once Linus retires, the whole thing is doomed ...

Random fact: I bought a car at an estate sale from Linus’s neighbor once. The only reason I knew it was his house is because he used to drive this obnoxious yellow Mercedes with ‘LINUX’ on the license plate, and I saw it nearby. Also, we were friends in Google+, and I feel like that should count for something.

A LOT of things in civilization only work because of the people who built them, or at least people who continued to have the same or similar standards of behavior, competence etc as those that did. Once that all goes away, everything falls apart. Tbh, as critical as Linux is, it looks like just the tip of the iceberg, or but one example case, atm.

I literally went from trying to program games in java for a month or two to programming in C++ and trying to program game engines to then finding a game about making a turing complete computer and doing so to programming in Rust some other higher level things than that to finally what I am working on more actively right now which is learning about how operating systems work and trying to make one written completely in Rust without having to use assembly, I already know how annoying assembly is to program with because of the game previously mentioned and for the life of me I can't remember the conventions people have come up with for their version of assembly at best I know the most basic types of assembly work being just a find and replace with binary data that directly controls the hardware. What I mean to say with this is I found some very interesting things out by just trying to understand what code I was writing and how things worked.

Part of keeping it simple, for me, is repeating myself until I know more definitively if it was actually repetitive. All too often you assume something is the same as something else, and then you get further into the problem and you were either wrong or the circumstances have changed. It's often easy to combine things that turn out to overlap in the future if they truly do, but it's a pain starting and continuing to retrofit DRY early on regardless of the situation.

Also, something I've seen happen too much is making something a function because it's used two or three times. This is fine as long as the same intent is behind the code. Sometimes the same code is used for different things and as such will change for different reasons. That is the biggest caveat I apply to DRY

@SanderDecleer of course different code will use slightly different functions. That’s why function arguments accept VARIABLES. Lol. They VARY. Doesn’t mean there needs to be a separate goddamn function for every single variation.

@@SanderDecleer as long as you write same code twice, its really bad, cose as soon as he need to be updated (and he will needs in general), you have to check every f**** spot where that code was duplicated to update those part too ... but feel free to copy paste same code if you want, as long as i dont work on it i dont really care x')

@@grimpowsify In most cases I agree. But there are cases where two different concepts use the exact same code. When these concepts use the same method you might accidentally change more than you want while reworking that bit of code. That is why, for me in specific cases, I don't care two methods have the same nody. Copy pasting entire chunks of logic to do the exact same thing over and over again is an entirely different thing.

For business too😁

Yeah like, sometimes you need to make yourself use a simple 2d 8x8 byte array, and stop asking questions like "but what if the board needs to be customizable?" or "what if i'll need to add more unique pieces in runtime?" - first of all, the answer is "most definitely not", and second of all, unless it is the whole premise of what you're doing, just don't give a shit and do it the simple way. If you eventually find out that you didn't even need it - good! If it turns out that you have to rewrite the whole codebase to implement it - good, that's invaluable experience! I really need to understand it myself as well... Good luck with your chess project, hope it'll turn out great!

i guess the problem on working with abstraction is that you also have to set your mind to the abstraction also, i learned dev on procedural, and the difficult part of switching to OOP isnt to learn and understand what object is, its more, now i have to ignore or dont really care on what will call my object, or getting the whole process in the code in mind, its more, i have an object, he need that and that, he can do this and this and i'm working at this level on this object so for example with chess, i need to create a chessman object, it have a position X;Y you could ask yourself does those positions values could be negative, does they have a maximum or a minimum ? then you can also say, i dont know so two option -> you dont set rule on min/max pos, or you also can add public properties that set thoses limits ... a chessman can move, so he should have a method to deplace it, you can ask yourself, how i will implement it ? then that could be by a translation (like a vector on X/Y), or simply passing the new position ... mebbe an enum to know wich type of Chessman it is (or just simple string to say pawn etc ..), but dont specify the rule of the chess inside the chessman object. in fact i think the "good way" to do it is that you end with a chessman object where we can know it actual position, its type (or name) and we can move it. its ALL. after that you can make a "engine" that will use those chessman object to applie moving rules, winning conditions etc (whatever you want in fact) ... and i guess with those chessman object you will also be able to reuse them for a checkers game .. (i didnt coded neither a checkers game or a chess game, but that gived me the motivation to make one for fun sooner or latrer :p) in conclusion : try keep object as simple as possible, more you make your object simple to use and manipulate, more the entire code will be easy to use for yourself and for other. taking the time to "correctly" name your methods, properties and thinking for the view point of the object itself is a good start i guess.

Then he will cut off his penis. 🤣

Sure, but in a way it's like branch prediction. If you are bad at guessing what tomorrow's problems are, you are just making it worse.

The way you deal with that is documenting the known limitations and possible future problems ahead of time so fixing them can make it onto the roadmap before they become problems. It doesn't work for everything (e.g. software running off your premises or when software and hardware are tightly coupled), but often it does.

The problem is, you don't know, actually know, what tomorrow's problems are going to be. And there's rarely a shortage of "today's problems" to deal with first.

​@@VojtaJavoraso what you're saying is we should get CPU prediction architects to use their powers as a team leader instead of a CPU architect... Interesting.

How come problems exist tomorrow?

"No superfluous words." What? He's verbose af. Like 20% of his words are dedicated to denigrating colleagues.

Oh yeah, because you are not the subject.

The entire Salesforce Development field is just an abstraction built over product development. 👎🏻