81–90 of 128 posts
I would love an annotated falsehoods. For instance, one of the falsehoods programmers believe about programming: Most processors in active use are 32-bit or larger. 16-bit or larger? 8-bit or larger? OH COME ON!
Don't leave us hanging! What is the <8-bit processor in common-enough use to not fit into (1 - Most)?
Don't implement date and time calculations yourself, just use the library, even for things like "add a day".
Don't parse addresses yourself, use a library. Don't validate email yourself, use a library. Don't validate input yourself, use a library.
Unless the runtime or memory space is absolutely critical to your application, using a library won't make things noticeably worse.
Here's one I haven't seen on a list: When you onboard to a new company, they will automatically give you access to whatever systems you need to do your job. or It will be automatic or easy to get access to all the systems you need to do your job.
You will be onboarded to your new company.
It feels like many of these speak to poorly defined requirements.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In regards to your last line, I feel like we do need to give people some leeway and not assume bigoted intent. Most of the things we can gig people for not implementing nowadays are only recently important in our cultural consciousness. English has traditionally shied away from using accents and one can reasonably assume that if a person signs up for my English language website, they won't be using Chinese characters…
> I also think using they/them is only recently considered grammatically acceptable. In general, as a singular gender neutral third person pronoun for a person of unknown, unclear, or unspecified gender, they/them is approximately as old as modern english itself, having been clearly used by one of the earliest practitioners of the language, Shakespeare. What's modern is the idea that it's somehow incorrect to have a…
Growing up, though, I was taught to use "he or she" / "she or he" in English class and they/them was always used in the context of third person plural. I don't consider it a newfangled thing, but the embrace of it feels new.
> A curated list of falsehoods programmers believe in. No, these "awesome" lists are seldom curated . They are just dumps of hundreds or thousands of links.
This is in no way a list of falsehoods, there is not a single one in the repository. It is a dump of links to other people's articles about falsehoods (or other people's dumps of links to others). I am surprised why they would claim that, maybe they copied another "awesome list" template?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bias isn't the same as being bigoted. If when you find out you missed it you go "Oh, crap, you're right! We should fix that" you had a bias. If when you find out you missed it you start to defend why it's fine to not include it (not to admit you should, but maybe you don't have time/it isn't worth the cost), that's the point it's bigoted. It's the difference between making a mistake, and getting defensive that it was…
> If when you find out you missed it you start to defend why it's fine to not include it (not to admit you should, but maybe you don't have time/it isn't worth the cost), that's the point it's bigoted. > > It's the difference between making a mistake, and getting defensive that it wasn't a mistake. I think that definition is pretty good, but it also reveals something about the popular usage of the term "bigot". IIUC,…
I really enjoyed this - several LOL's. I loved the sequence of falsehoods about compilers: - The compiler won’t have bugs. - The compiler won’t have show-stopping bugs. - The compiler’s bugs will be fixed quickly. - The compiler’s bugs can be fixed. But I think they should have added: - My code does not work because of bugs in the compiler..
> Because the bugs are in their code, not mine.
> valid email address exactly has one @ character A normal email address exactly has one @ character. There is an infinite number of possible weird things everyone has little though non-zero chance to encounter on every corner of their life. > therefore your implementation should allow this I wouldn't be sure it should. Implementing support for this has direct and indirect, explicit and implicit costs one will have t…
All that said, there are a number of really good email validators out there in the wild. One of the oldest can be found at http://isemail.info/about , (along with a test suite to write your own implementation and some sage advice about the basic approaches it's reasonable to take when validating email addresses). Yes, dependencies aren't completely free conceptually, even when they're distributed free of charge, but…
I personally accept any string that is between 3 bytes and 1 kilobyte, if they click the link in it then it's good.
I would love an annotated falsehoods. For instance, one of the falsehoods programmers believe about programming: Most processors in active use are 32-bit or larger. 16-bit or larger? 8-bit or larger? OH COME ON!