namark @namark@qoto.org
Joined Jan 2020
@schnedan@kif.rocks Exception safety tho, a lot of common practice and guidelines revolve around it, like using make_smth instead of new operator, avoiding initialization in constructor body at all cost, "omg do I have to duplicate my entire function body in noexcept specifier ToT" etc.
@saxnot guide rails that are not fit for the problem prevent optimal solution for it to be found. A suboptimal solution is an error in software that matters, but indeed totally acceptable in heaps of inconsequential glue code that underlies our snake oil industry. Guide rails in C++ are user defined and fitted to problem domain.
@schnedan@kif.rocks @kornel
@saxnot You should at least learn one of the languages you talk about before you criticize another.
Memory fragmentation and memory safety are not the same thing.
Java having no memory leaks is a joke.
Rust being written in rust is also a joke.
C++ has been moving ahead since its inception, on the forefront of innovation in many areas of language design and implementation, defining new paradigms and standards of quality, inspiring many spinoffs like D and Rust, which often don't stand the test of time due to being too opinionated and considering the language above its userbase. Properly supporting old code mixed with new one (not isolated and incompatible), is part of respecting the userbase. Breaking changes are only introduced when it's reasonable to assume that majority does not heavily rely on the old behavior, so to deprecate something you must first convince the userbase to stop relying on it, just like rust evangelist going door to door telling everyone to rewrite everything in rust, except in the correct order.
The biggest "problem" with c++ is that it has no buzzwords and marketing hype behind it, so you have to actually put real effort into learning it to understand its strengths.
@schnedan@kif.rocks @kornel
@lucifargundam gotta love the bailouts, another version:
<< passes a test
>> you did best on our test!
<< goes through 2 interviews
>> ok, great, we have a lot of work for you, keep you busy for a while, full-time and all, when will you be available?
<< communicates the potential switch with current employer and specifies a timeline
>> half you proposed rate!
<< comes up with the most polite way to flip them off
@freemo And yet you keep discussing, I take it without thinking then, nice
@freemo that's not the elephant in the room, but instead of spoon-feeding, I'm gonna wait and see if you can maybe pick up on it yourself this time.
@freemo I meant the joke about the deduced motivation, you seem pretty set in that reply on refuting it, and not much more. Meanwhile ignoring the elephant in the room.
@freemo so that's your takeaway, can't wait to refute that one joke, nice
witness @freemo waving the banhammer at me, after I roasted his religious belief in parker topology
https://qoto.org/web/statuses/107298780694262612
"the only reason I protect you at all when reports come in time and time again is because even people with the maturity of a toddler deserve a voice"
https://qoto.org/web/statuses/107327006526109920
"Act like a mature adult with people, at least within reason and try to, or else I will be forced to escalate the matter."
and this is the same @freemo who would try to publicly humiliate a known troubled teenager
https://qoto.org/web/statuses/107310476634263423
presented motivation: he's getting fed up with the horrible me who is harassing everyone into oblivion
deduced motivation: looking for an excuse to erase the record of the roast
@freemo wow, what a mighty ignore, one might even think you have nothing say... but no! It's clearly me who just does not deserve the enlightenment of the fundamental error of my ways.
@freemo nice job plucking a sentence out of context... the person clearly didn't read what I wrote and was continually ignoring my point about the meaning of the words majority and minority, but oh no, what harsh language did I choose to point that out, and what a direct attack at their person (and not at all at their actions) it was?!
Oh I'm sorry you are not banning me right now cause you are not quite fed up? Oh what relief! Instead you are just warning me that once you do get properly fed up you will. Again I ask you to amend the instance rules to clarify that.
@freemo pointing out that someone said something stupid is a personal insult, sure. I would argue, but I'm afraid you might resort to the impenetrable defense of "I don't care about english language, this is a STEM instance, which means you do as I say or you go", might as well add to the instances rule list - "when admin get fed up you get banned"
@freemo chances to kiss the hurt butt or what?
@freemo sure, go ahead, ban me cause you are butthurt
@soundwave I'm abrasive I admit, but what's the fun in an argument without a little bit flare? You were rather bold in your wording as well, so I didn't expect you to be too sensitive.
To further elaborate, when considering a dichotomy it is reasonable to expect a majority choice. I mean you can get a 50/50 split but oh well we can handle that somehow in the rare cases where it comes up. Simply make one step forward to an equivalence relation of 3 classes, and the possibility of getting a disagreement of 3 minorities becomes much more concerning. Go any further and said possibility turns into a certainty, given that the presented choices are meaningful. But you need to make it work so what do you do? Well you have to manipulate people into believing that every matter is a dichotomy. "You're either right or you're wrong, it's left or right question, so pick a side. Oh you wanted option C, but you see, everyone else, aka the mindless mob of idiots we all hate, are going to chose between B and A, so your choice will just go to waste unless you also pick the lesser evil between the two. I know this, because I will make this true. This is the voice of people speaking, yes." Thus, defeating any purpose the statistic could ever hope to have, the majority rule fails, not to be smart or right, but to exist. And god forbid there are matters that are not at all equivalence relations, we must not allow that to ever happen. If nothing else, at the very least we must have a total order that explains and decides absolutely everything, within which we will then define an equivalence relation, which we will also make sure to be a for all intents and purposes a dichotomy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_relation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_order
