My first thought was “a hwat now?”
That's exactly what made me click on the link.
I guess it counts as a portfolio project, but I'm not seeing any usecase that fits this tool.
This blog post writes a dissertation about garbage collection, heap memory management, the absolute need to take courses on assembly language, and other contrived and absurd tangents.
Looking at the code, the guy gets a double-free because he instantiates two std::unique_ptr from the same raw pointer.
I'm sure the author felt very clever to pull up all these topics to write a blog post about, but in the end all they're doing is writing buggy code based on their misconception of a topic.
I think it's safe to assume that medicare.meme won't do scammers much good.
On a more serious note, a TLD is just one of the many ways to clickjack. Even godaddy suggests weird combinations using respectable TLDs such as medicared.com, and even medicare.eu.
I understand. I have to admit I felt a little dirty after pasting that text.
(...) it was "because the organizer wants big names and it probably seemed like an easy way to address their diversity concerns.
Wouldn't it be easier to, say, invite real people to deliver real talks? How exactly is it easier to spend multiple years maintaining sock puppet accounts than simply sporadically extend an invitation to someone?
Seriously. The state of TLDs is a mess.
Even though I agree that the TLD scene is getting way out of hand, I really don't agree the current state is worse than having just a couple of TLDs and ccTLDs, specially considering the massive problem that is domain squatting.
It's not like ccTLDs haven't been abused as vanity TLDs. If demand is already there, why not supply it adequately?
why not ~~just buy a proper charger~~ waste $50 ?
It seems to be a combination of both things. They believe that switching will attract contributors and make it more modern… but also they seem to have had some trouble with thread safety in C++ that would have required them to do some restructuring anyway.
It still feels like at best they are optimizing for the wrong metric and at worse they are just trying to rationalize an arbitrary choice.
I mean, the first reason they point out is "high probability of still being relevant in a decade." I mean, is Rust even a candidate in this domain? All leading programming languages have been around for longer than Rust and are actually specified in international standards, which ensures they will be around for essentially all eternity. Rust provides nothing of the sort. Is there anyone willing to put their hands in the fire for the expectation they will be able to build today's Rust projects a decade from now?
Also, Rust is renowned for having a steep and tough learning curve. Those are hardly the traits you seek to increase your potential userbase.
More importantly, threading stuff is limited to key architecture components that once in place are expected to change little to nothing. It's like picking .NET because you think it supports background processes well. Except the bulk of your code changes won't touch that, so what's the point?
Anyway, anyone is free to invest their time and effort in any venture without having to explain their motivations to anyone.
I love the idea of being able to fit 4 big D’s
I'm more interested in knowing whether the charger actually supports that type of usage.
Eduards Sizovs, the DevTernity organizer accused of making up fake female speakers, felt it was the right PR move to post this message on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/eduardsi/status/1728447955122921745
So I've been called out (and canceled?) by listing a person on my conference's website (who never actually made it to the final program). JUST A RANDOM PERSON ON THE CONFERENCE WEBSITE canceled all the good work I've been doing for 15+ years. All focus on that.
I said it was a mistake, a bug that turned out to be a feature. I even fixed that on my website! We're cool? Nooooo, we want blood! Let's cancel this SINNER!
The amount of hate and lynching I keep receiving is as if I would have scammed or killed someone. But I won't defend myself because I don't feel guilty. I did nothing terrible that I need to apologize for. The conference has always delivered on its promise. It's an awesome, inclusive, event. And yes, I like Uncle Bob's talks. They're damn good.
When the mob comes for you, you're alone. So, let it be. I'll keep doing a great conference. With all speakers, half the speakers, or I'll be speaking alone on all tracks and lose my voice. But the event will be a blast. Like always. I'll die while doing great work. But the mob won't kill me.
I don't think that tone-deaf is the right word for this.
In DDD, the model is loaded before any business logic is executed
That's really not a DDD requirement. Having a domain model does not require you to preload data to run business logic. For example, you can easily have business logic that only takes as input a value object and triggers a usecase, and you do not need to preload anything to instantiate a value.
Any tool can be misused, but there's a saying about those who blame the tools.
If you use a component designed to take over the ownership of an object but somehow make the mistake of assigning the same object to multiple components, the problem is not the language you're using. The problem is that you aren't paying attention to what you're doing.