Me, still using negative int values to represent errors in 2023 😴
The C++ committee really dropped the ball by adding std::optional in C++17 but failing to follow suit and add a std::result monadic vocabulary type similar to Rust's std::result. Supporting a vocabulary type that provides syntactic sugar to handle both success and error return types represents a missed opportunity to improve C++'s readability and developer experience.
They force you think of o(n) and train you better than anything else on how to write your functions (but not how to organise them).
I agree. I think it's all about blind spots. A software engineer spends most of the time reading code, and the changesets they write most of the time are not algorithms or any fancy iteration beyond doing a vanilla for loop over a collection. leetcode-type exercises tend to invert that tendency, and present us with challenges which we would only rarely tackle. It's a good exercise in the sense that it forces a type of usecase we don't often use. Still, their practical usefulness beyond coding crossword puzzles is very limited.
This might sound silly but I think that coding challenges like HackerRank, CodeSignal help me improve/learn programming.
At first I thought they were utter crap, and recruiters used them to test candidates on artificial problems that matter nothing and reflected no relevant skill. I still do, they are awful at that. What a complete waste of time and effort.
However, these coding challenges are like crossword puzzles. They present us with nonsense challenges that provide us with the opportunity to employ obscure programming constructs on a multitude of programming languages in a way that rarely happen in real world professional settings. I use them to explore obscure corners of standard libraries, solve the same problem in multiple ways, employ different idiomatic ways to iterate over data structures, etc. That's helpful in a way.
Nothing. Just read Mozilla’s Manifesto
Your trolling skills are subpar but given this is a lazy weekend I guess I'll bite just for the entertaining value.
Let's go through "Principle 2, 3, 4 and 7", shall we?
Principle 2 The internet is a global public resource that must remain open and accessible.
Making source code available through GitHub is a realization of Principle 2. You got it exactly backwards.
Principle 3 The internet must enrich the lives of individual human beings.
I don't even know what could possess you to believe that making a software project available through GitHub would jeopardize this. Anyway.
Principle 7 Free and open source software promotes the development of the internet as a public resource.
That's what making FLOSS projects available to the public through GitHub does. GitHub, by providing managed hosting to Mozilla to host Firefox's project tree and making it available to the public, is unquestionably meeting this goal, both in its letter and its spirit.
You need to put some effort into finding things to be outraged about.
What a treat. I have to admit that my mental model of git cherry-pick was just "it takes a change and applies it as a patch". I guess it isn't. That would explain a couple of experiences I had where a cherry-pick came with a lot of unrelated crap tied to it.
TIL.
You're absolutely right. Wrong link posted to the wrong community. I apologize for the snafu.
Because while you do have control (and “copies”) of the source code repository, that’s not really true for the ecosystem around it - tickets, pull requests, …
The announcement to drop Mercurial quite clearly states that their workflow won't change and that GitHub pull requests are not considered a part of their workflow.
Also, that's entirely irrelevant to start with. Either you care about software freedom and software quality, or you don't. If you care about software freedom you care about having free and unrestricted access to FLOSS projects such as Firefox, which GitHub clearly provides. If you care about software quality you'd care about the Firefox team picking the absolute best tools for the job that they themselves picked.
Mozilla allegedly stands for a bunch of stuff that is be definition incompatible with hosting code on GitHub as it is.
Your statement is fundamentally wrong on many levels, including the fact that it goes against the fundamental premise of FLOSS which is that "the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software."
I bet a lot of people were expecting a lot more from them (...)
You only speak for yourself. You do not have a mandate to speak on behalf of anyone, including Firefox users such as myself. Keep your personal opinions as personal. You have the right to have a personal opinion, but you do not have the right to pass them off as anyone else's.
Honoring flags is not the same thing as fully supporting a standard version. Currently GCC still marks a few features as missing from GCC entirely.
I think they were making a joke
The missing /s, coupled with some absurd comments on this thread, make it hard to tell apart the jokes from the activists.
you meant that the focus of the change wasn’t GH
They are dropping Mercurial and focusing on Git. Incidentally, they happen to host the Git project on GitHub. GitHub is used for hosting, and they don't even use basic features such as pull requests.
Again, this is really not about GitHub at all.
CMake also helps integrate Cppcheck by setting a single CMake variable when configuring a CMake project:
CMAKE_C_CPPCHECKand/orCMAKE_CXX_CPPCHECK.Low-effort, high-reward.