magic_lobster_party

What’s happening is that support from VC money is drying up. Tech companies have for a long time survived on the promise that they will eventually be much more profitable in the future. It doesn’t matter if it’s not profitable today. They will be in the future.

Now we’re in a period where there’s more pressure on tech companies to be profitable today. That’s why they’re going for such anti consumer behaviors. They want to make more with less.

I’m not sure if there’s a bubble bursting. It could just be a plateau.

Isn’t problem solving mostly put things together of what you’ve learned before?

I agree that people shouldn’t have to die over this, but Putin is dedicated to the invasion on Ukraine. He won’t stop just because someone kindly ask him to stop over the phone. He’ll continue until there’s no Ukraine anymore, and then he might also go for Moldova and other former Soviet countries.

Ukraine has to defend themselves for as long as Putin is willing to continue the war.

Go tell Putin and his friends to stop the invasion and hand back all the Ukrainian territory they’ve stolen. It’s easy!

I agree, and I count that as “key information that’s difficult to understand from the code”.

IMO, comments should be used to provide value to the code. If they’re used too much, then readers of the code will more likely stop reading them altogether. They already got what they need from the code itself and the comments usually don’t add much value.

If they’re sparse, then that’s a good indication they’re important and shouldn’t be missed.

I think comments are good as a last resort when it’s difficult to communicate the intention of the code with other means.

If I find code that’s hard to understand, I’ll first try to find better variable or function names. Often this is enough.

If it’s still too difficult to understand, I try to restructure the code to better communicate the flow of the code.

If that doesn’t help (or is too difficult), then I might add a comment explaining key information that’s difficult to understand from the code.

The only problem is to ensure the entire team agrees to only use it like an interface and nothing else. But I guess that’s the only proper way to do it in C++, for now.

In your example, the declaration of ArrayList look like:

public class ArrayList extends AbstractList implements List {
}

The dependence on AbstractList is public. Any public method in AbstractList is also accessible from the outside. It opens up for tricky dependencies that can be difficult to unravel.

Compare it with my solution:

public class ArrayList implements List {
    private AbstractList = new AbstractList();
}

Nothing about the internals of ArrayList is exposed. You’re free to change the internals however you want. There’s no chance any outside code will depend on this implementation detail.

If the lists have shared components then that can be solved with composition. It’s semantically the same as using abstract classes, but with the difference that this code dependency doesn’t need to be exposed to the outside. This makes the dependency more loosely coupled.

I usually break it out using composition if that’s ever needed. Either by wrapping around all the implementations, or as a separate component that is injected into each implementation.

Ask Bjarne to add interfaces enough many times until he gives in.

On a more serious note, I’m not exactly sure what the best C++ practice is. I guess you just have to live with abstract classes if you really want interfaces.

In 99% of the cases, inheritance can easily be replaced with composition and/or interfaces. Abstract classes tend to cause hard dependencies that are tough to work with.

I’m not sure why you would use abstract classes without data. Just use interfaces.

So things like abstract classes are mostly absent from my codebase.

I believe the consensus nowadays is that abstract classes should be avoided like the plague even in languages like Java and C#.

“I’m using affordable care act! I don’t want Obamacare!”

They’re lobbying so they can make more money from cryptocurrency. It’s not going to benefit the common folk in any way (unless you believe in trickle down economics).

There’s a special place in hell for those who set an upper limit in password lengths.

Reserves = USDT, which is definitely backed by real USD.

and you’d have the same problem cryptocurrency has.

No, that’s not going to happen. The reason why cryptocurrencies must rely on a consensus algorithm is because the order of transactions matter. One transaction can make another transaction impossible depending on which one comes first.

Fediverse doesn’t have this strict condition. No post and comment can make another impossible. It’s also not the entire world if a post is lost.

There’s a huge difference.

Fediverse uses almost no energy compared to Reddit and Twitter. This is because few people are using fediverse alternatives.

Bitcoin uses more energy than entire countries, despite few people using it.

In my team we use both Linux and Mac (I don’t want to disclose my company, but it’s in Sweden). IT isn’t entirely happy about some of us using Linux because it’s more difficult for them to administer the computers (i.e. install spyware), but so far they’ve been unsuccessful in making us switch.