kochthesecond

> for questions throughout the day as I attempt to do productive tasks so I can't take some "me time" and 8 hours later, someone responds on the core issue I need to work in... I think this illustratates the issue I and other remote workers often face.

This is how my office life is..

Have you heard of our Lord and savior, the single method interface?

A few comments.

Very rarely I get stuff that is so badly made, or naively implemented that I just have to say no, then go help the person redesign the solution. This happens rarely though, maybe twice a year with a fresh employee.

If the code is not formatted to the linter, it should not have been submitted for review and I will probably reject it. We have to hold our work to some kind of standard.

Otherwise I do the "I did not understand this, can you please explain?" Quite a bit if a part is confusing.

I try to invite to a discussion, not demand doing it to my taste and make it clear a lot of the comments are suggestions for future work.

And if your daughter was murdered, you want them dead.

That is not how we made our legislation work.

And now your customers expect to see new data immediately reflected in their account. What then?

Doesn't e-ink have horrible lag?

I was about to say this. Most type systems in practical use are not mathematically sound.

I still request a MacBook for work, but I can no longer buy it for my private use. It's just too expensive compared to their competitors.

While safe bets, they did launch Dota 2 and CSGO. The only question was wether the pre exisiting communities would accept them under Valve.

That is good. You know your situation best

While crude, I believe he is right.

I have seen it too many times with project managers and now my CTO. Trying to still code and fix that terrible bug with already too little time. Ends up slowing down everyone because he never can get anything finished, or breaking things on a Thursday at 6:49pm because of the half baked solution he thought was good enough, but exploded in production, which he then has to spend 1 more hour fixing and 6 more hours cleaning up the aftermath. Spend your time reviewing and mentoring and try replacing yourself with someone who has time.

You now have important shit to do.

I don't agree with the reasoning around the usage of the Master, but I am happy with Maintainer which seems like a better word.

We are paying for gitlab, and the only think I'd like to see from this list is rebase before merge...

I think gitlab are doing a pretty good job with their product.

I am more inclined to your sentiment. Now there is no excuse for badly formatted code and being a lazy slob, and I never use the word refactor in the sense it is used here.

I often _redesign_ old code to meet new requirements and to support new features, but I would not call it refactoring.

I always strive to leave the code better than when I found it. But I would not name it refactoring.

Thank you, that sounds like a pretty good idea.

Also realized, this is a bit analogous to how Bitcoin works. In Bitcoin _every_ other node in the network will validate (audit) some proposed work. If at least 51% of the nodes in the network agree that some piece of work is valid, it has a good chance of becoming part of the permanent history (next block on the chain).

If you are an actual drug company, I suspect politics and approval processes are at least as expensive to the company, as the actual R&D itself. It is incredibly hard to get into the market with todays legislation.

Drug cartels probably spent a lot of money getting out of legal trouble and dealing with international police

I also try to stress this principle. Data and its structure is the most important part, and bring accurate and explicit, lets the author communicate their design better than mountains of doc.

Or inversely: if the data presented are complex and convoluted, you will need mountains of docs to try explain its design.

I tried both at the beginning of 2016, and neither of them seemed very usable at that stage. Both look much better now, and I can't wait to give them a shot.

Also noting that the semantic UI docs still give a horrible mobile experience (iOS 11).

Java 8/9 releases where a disaster from a organizational perspective.

The quicker pace with smaller changes will hopefully help with this friction.

You are being forced to use the new version, as support for the previous version ends as the next version is released.

I also found the casting of the show underwhelming. The sci-fi is terrific, but the casting made it hard to get into. The storytelling I found good enough. I bet it's hard to get a cast together that can work well enough in all those close quarters scenes with lots of choices

I watched the first season a few years ago. It is good, solid, hard sci-fi. But like said below, it didn't 'wow' me. Considering the current lack of good sci-fi series, I really appreciated the show.

I won't advocate for setting up all development to happen inside containers, but delivering software with containers is an order of magnitude simpler than delivering to a running os.

You need packaging, update scripts, init scripts and strict policies for upgrades and do coordinated library updates (on the shared environment), or nearly roll your own os where you bundle your dependency with the app. That is incredibly time consuming.

With containers you don't need init scripts, the team can update any dependency when they want/need without breaking someone elses environment. And with containers every team deliver the same 'thing', a runnable image. Not a blob of php, some ruby and java ear and wars that have to run on a shared platform.

Thank goodness there is no operator overloading. I maintain 15 year old java codebases and am very happy they did not add user defined operators...

This. Playing competitively on Linux is still an exercise in frustration.

I am also disappointed by this, I want it to be more painful to use rebindable references than final (immutable) references.

In your example, after you manually change the return type at the caller to Bar from Foo, the usage of Foo.length and Bar.length remains and nothing will help you if they changed semantics with neither inferred nor explicit types. The access of the length field is still valid in either case.

I started 4 years ago and want to recommend starting somewhere with a good program for new hires and preferably some kind of follow up program after starting.

The checksums might be scoped per user in some way, or they are quite brave

Well, I did not know that.

Are there any sources where I can read more? I know Google fought a lot over similar issues and eventually withdrew their hardware from China.

Also, the Chinese are building a citizen scoring card system, that will rate your standing with the government from birth to death.