|
Well, I lost!
Wordle 385 X/6
⬛⬛🟨⬛🟨
⬛🟨🟨🟨🟨
🟨🟨🟨⬛🟨
🟩🟩🟨⬛🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬛
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬛
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 385 5/6*
⬜⬜🟨⬜⬜
🟨🟨⬜🟨🟨
🟨🟨🟨🟨⬜
🟩🟨🟨🟨🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 385 6/6*
⬜🟨⬜🟨🟨
🟨🟨⬜🟨🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ OK. Fortunately, I only see 3 more possibilities.
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ Hope I didn't miss one...
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Think I'll pass on the lottery ticket today. 
This is how hard mode gets you.
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 385 5/6
⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜
🟨🟨🟨⬜🟨
🟨🟨🟨⬜🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
In our Daily News wire (7/8/2022), The Code Project has listed two completely opposing reports.
The first is "Online programming IDEs can be used to launch remote cyberattacks"
The second is "The Visual Studio Code Server (private preview)"
I find such reporting very amusing. 
On the one hand, the first report describes the use of online programming IDEs as just another avenue for criminally oriented hackers to exploit such software for additional attack vectors.
On the other, Microsoft announces its preview of its VS Code Server that allows you to program VS Code projects remotely.
What, Git isn't good enough anymore for collaborative work!?!?
What is up with Microsoft? It seems that they just keep producing more tools that in reality no one really needs...
Steve Naidamast
Sr. Software Engineer
Black Falcon Software, Inc.
blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
|
|
|
|
|
They have to match competitors that let you run web based IDEs via prebuilt containers.
|
|
|
|
|
They don't have to but they choose to
Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming “Wow! What a Ride!" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Because of this post, I decided to try this feature out to help someone on the other side of the world learn some more C++. So it's not entirely useless. It made it easy to show him what I was trying to show him.
Thanks for your rant! It was helpful. 
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Teaching someone with this type of technology is one thing. Implementing this technology into corporate environments and small/medium business environments is something completely different.
But I am happy that my "rant" helped someone out...
Steve Naidamast
Sr. Software Engineer
Black Falcon Software, Inc.
blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
|
|
|
|
|
I totally agree. thanks again!
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know if it's just Rust, or if it's me, but I just can't seem to pick it up. Their container system is strange to me. I guess it would probably help if it had some kind of IDE to manage them. But more than that I try reading the documentation on the language and my eyes start to glaze over and I go into dumb-ss mode. 
I used to just absorb new programming languages. I think maybe I'm getting old? I read somewhere that our intelligence and mental flexibility peaks in our late 20s? and levels out for awhile before declining, so that concerns me. Part of being able to program well means taking in new information all the time, but I look at even the web these days, I look at Rust, and it's foreign to me. 
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: I used to just absorb new programming languages. I think maybe I'm getting old? I read somewhere that our intelligence and mental flexibility peaks in our late 20s?
Possibly. However, I read Rust learning curve is steep (even for monsters).
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
I hope that's what it is. But then I picked up C++ pretty readily. I was a lot younger then though. And it did take me years before I was what I would consider proficient with it. Even still there are holes in my knowledge, so I guess yeah. I'm maybe just worrying about this for no good reason.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Younger-You probably overestimated how good they were with C++ for that learning period.
Today-You, being older and wiser (or at least more self-aware), is much more aware that your skills in a language you've only used briefly are nowhere near as complete in one you've spent many years with.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't. I had to be told I was good at it for years before I decided I wasn't terrible, and even now I have my doubts. But I *was* able to learn it.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to “it sux getting old”.
Quote: intelligence and mental flexibility peaks in our late 20s
I disagree, I reckon I did my best work when I was in my 40’s. I had 20+ years experience to call on and was still flexible enough to take on new tech.
I think everyone has an affinity with something. Me, I’ve always liked Office automation & web services. In the last 2 years I’ve had the opportunity to use OpenXML and I’ve just started looking at REST. I’m hitting the other side of mid 50’s and I think I’m doing Ok with what I’m doing, but I am completely lost with a lot of stuff outside of that.
What we like we do with enthusiasm (and it’s easy), when we don’t the eyelids become heavy.
// TODO: Insert something here Top ten reasons why I'm lazy
1.
|
|
|
|
|
That's a good point. I was 30something before I really picked up parsing. Maybe what I read was nonsense. 
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: intelligence and mental flexibility peaks in our late 20s
Quote: I reckon I did my best work when I was in my 40’s
I see no contradiction.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
yacCarsten wrote: What we like we do with enthusiasm (and it’s easy), when we don’t the eyelids become heavy.
This is very true. As a young professional, I was excited about everything and learned everything very quickly.
Fast forward 10 years, and I started picking-n-choosing, as IT saw so much change and churn. At the time I thought I was overburdened with choices, but in hindsight I had lost my enthusiasm for "everything".
Fast forward another 20 years and I pick-n-choose very selectively -- the very few things that excite me I still learn quickly, but learning Go or Rust? The manuals are totally fantastic when I have insomnia ...
Something else to consider -- 30 to 40 years ago, IT was still expanding. We didn't have the plethora of languages we do today, although at the time I thought we had a lot. Now? Everything I see is a retread of earlier stuff in a different package (lipstick on a pig), or it's a monument to ego (see! I made a new language!).
|
|
|
|
|
BryanFazekas wrote: We didn't have the plethora of languages we do today
Yes we did ... but they were different languages, not just minor variations of C!
Think of APL, with it workspace concept and free floating matrices and functions.
Think of Snobol, with its predicate matching integrated into an algorithmic programming language.
Think of Lisp, and its very data structured (list) oriented design.
Think of Prolog, the predicate language that was expected to take over the world through the '5th generation project'.
Think of purely functional languages such as Erlang.
Think of highly parallel languages such as Occam.
Think of event oriented languages such as CHILL.
Languages where different and exciting. Who cares about yet another minor change to C syntax?
Besides: The majority of language developments today certainly are not done to provide you with a better language, but to lure you into some different infrastructure, software ecology, environment, ... Once you have entered it, you are locked into it. The development you do in, say, Python (randomly chosen example!), cannot easily be utilized by other developers unless they as well move into the Python sphere. Which is the exact reason for the Python ecology being designed the way it is: As a way to exert power, to control as much as possible of the software development process, bringing it into the Python ecosystem. That seems to be its basic purpose: There is no real reason why Python should not be just another algorithmic language alongside with all the old ones.
Sure, there are modern variants of most 'non-c-derived' languages, but who cares about them today? In language discussions, their only purpose seems to be to make old farts (like me) shut up. In all respects, they are irrelevant.
So: New languages of today, yet another variation of c syntax, are plainly boring! Who would care to study them?
|
|
|
|
|
trønderen wrote: Yes we did ... but they were different languages, not just minor variations of C!
You raise a good point, although my POV is a bit different. I learned 2 of the languages you mentioned for individual contracts, and never had a reason to learn any of the others. In the business consulting world I lived in, only a handful of mainstream languages had any market share. As a consultant, I focused on languages that I could use professionally.
trønderen wrote: As a way to exert power, to control as much as possible of the software development process, bringing it into the Python ecosystem.
That is an excellent point!
I worked briefly in Object/1, which IIRC was billed as "Smalltalk with C syntax". I realized it was going no where and shifted roles to a C segment of the project. A few years later the customer had to completely rewrite the application from scratch, as support for that version of Object/1 was dropped.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess I learned most of the off-mainstream languages - such as APL, Snobol, Prolog - as a student; I didn't have to worry about professional use. Actually, I never used any of those three professionally, ever. None of the languages I have been required to learn as a professional has been anywhere close to 'exciting', considered as language designs.
'As a student' does not necessarily mean 'taking a course at the University'. Snobol I picked up for one single reason: On the network (before Internet - a network named MECC) we had access to at high school, I accidentally bumped into a version of Eliza (the therapist) - a rather primitive variant, but it was written in just 200 lines of Snobol source code. I was so impressed that I had to get to know that language!
APL I learned in high school, too: I made friends with a guy whose father worked at IBM, having been on the 5100 design team (Wikipedia: IBM 5100[^]). He was so proud of his father's work that he insisted I learned to program that machine! I did, and was fascinated by APL.
Prolog was a balloon ready to burst in my study days. It did, but not until I had completed a Prolog course. Nothing ever became of Prolog or the entire 5th generation project.
I never programmed in Occam at all, but we studied it in one course at the university.
I guess students of today also dive into a lot of stuff that they will never be using professionally. Maybe today they study all sorts of AI methods? I don't know. But I enjoyed being a student in the years when language design was hot and exciting.
|
|
|
|
|
trønderen wrote: I guess I learned most of the off-mainstream languages - such as APL, Snobol, Prolog - as a student
Same here. I learned 6 or 7 languages during my studies, ones never looked at again. Personally, I believe CS students should be taught a range of languages they might never touch again, as it provides a breadth of understand that makes future learning easier.
|
|
|
|
|
BryanFazekas wrote: Everything I see is a retread of earlier stuff in a different package (lipstick on a pig), or it's a monument to ego (see! I made a new language!).
Yup, pretty much.
We've passed the point where we've saturated the field of programming with novel features and languages, somewhere around 2010.
Last language I learned out of curiosity was D, and even then I knew it was just a rehash of C with a neat compiler and no viable ecosystem.
When looking at Rust, I quite literally see a C variant with thread safety that's specialized for system-level code.
I can pick it up in a day, maybe 2 if the toolchain is finicky, but why bother without a concrete project lined up?
I doubt it will teach me any great insight I've missed in the last 27 languages I picked up.
|
|
|
|
|
Kate-X257 wrote: I doubt it will teach me any great insight I've missed in the last 27 languages I picked up.
I know what you mean.
During the first 10 years of my career (started late 80's), on average I learned a new language, tool, library, or package every 3 months. This includes version changes where the differences required study and/or effort. A large part of that was being a consultant/contractor, so I learned whatever the new client needed.
Now? Companies and organizations pump out new versions in an attempt to stay relevant, and force churn by dropping support for "old" versions, after periods as short as 12 - 18 months.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
