It’s at most 40 years old technolog
the 60s were 60 years ago
It’s at most 40 years old technolog
the 60s were 60 years ago
. But it is trained well enough to correlate left and right together
eliza could do that 60 years ago
However you will now have rodent problems
chicken got you covered on that front too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iubf1oJdQQQ
============ Top 5: =============== HasThisTypePatternTriedToSneakInSomeGenericOrParameterizedTypePatternMatchingStuffAnywhereVisitor: 97
AbstractAnnotationConfigDispatcherServletInitializer: 52
AbstractInterruptibleBatchPreparedStatementSetter: 49
AbstractInterceptorDrivenBeanDefinitionDecorator: 48
GenericInterfaceDrivenDependencyInjectionAspect: 47
============ Factories: ===============
DefaultListableBeanFactory$DependencyObjectFactory
ObjectFactoryCreatingFactoryBean
SimpleBeanFactoryAwareAspectInstanceFactory
SingletonBeanFactoryLocator$BeanFactoryGroup
ConnectionFactoryUtils$ResourceFactory
DefaultListableBeanFactory$DependencyProviderFactory
ObjectFactoryCreatingFactoryBean$TargetBeanObjectFactory
JndiObjectFactoryBean$JndiObjectProxyFactory
DefaultListableBeanFactory$SerializedBeanFactoryReference
AbstractEntityManagerFactoryBean$SerializedEntityManagerFactoryBeanReference
BeanFactoryAspectInstanceFactory
SingletonBeanFactoryLocator$CountingBeanFactoryReference
TransactionAwarePersistenceManagerFactoryProxy$PersistenceManagerFactoryInvocationHandler
AbstractEntityManagerFactoryBean$ManagedEntityManagerFactoryInvocationHandler
the fact that a system eventually becomes complex and flawed is not due to engineering failures - it is inherent in the nature of changing systems
it is not. It’s just that there will be some point, where you need significant effort to keep the systems structure up to the new demands {1}. I find the debt-metaphor is quite apt [2]: In your scenario the debt accumulates until it’s easier to start fresh. But you can also manage your debt and keep going indefinitily. But in contrast to financial debt, paying of technical debt is much less obvious. First of all it is pretty much impossible to put any kind of exact number on it. On the other hand, it’s very hard to tell what you actually should do to pay it off. (tangent: This is why experienced engineers are worth so much: (among other things) they have seen how debt evolves over time, and may see the early signs).
[1] https://tidyfirst.substack.com/p/the-openclosedopen-principle
I use like 3 of the git-feature from intellij (out of 100 or so). But these 3 features save me a lot of time.
(the other 2 being the 3-way-merge-view and the commit-view where I can select changes for staging)
why would rebasing a feature branch change main?
the image does not update the feature branch. It merges the featurebranch into main with a regular old merge-commit on the main branch.
Another advice …quick way to squash all your commits
in your IDE select the commits you want to squash. Then rightclick. Then “squash”. All done.
it’s a great candidate. It was my first “real” languages (i.e. the first language, that is not php/js)
you have a text file. then call the compiler on it, and then you have a exe file, that you can run. It does exactly what it is supposed to do without thinking about the browser, the webserver, the JVM, or some other weirdness.
I get, that doing “good cpp” is difficult. And using all the weird languages features is difficult. But as long as you use strings, ints, ifs, fors, you should be fine. Just don’t use generics, templates, new (keep everything on the stack), multi-inheritance, complex libraries, and it’s a nice beginner language.
“hello OPS-team. Here is my simple program. Have fun running it on your kubernetes”