161–163 of 163 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There may a saturation of job offers but the offers aren’t not good. I’m not getting staff offers for $500k+/yr from random enterprise IT consultancy. I’d be lucky if I even got granted stock at many of these companies - let alone a $200k+ salary.
where do I apply for 500k USD/year job ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that the twitter interviewer introduced themselves as a xoogler is absurd.
What the heck is a xoogler? Sounds like some sci fi slime mold monster.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
UTF-32 !== UCS-2 and makes no guarantees about fixed code point size like UCS-2 did (and is considered deprecated because of that). There's an encoding issue with UTF-16 extending past the current "Astral Plane", but neither UTF-8 nor UTF-32 have that problem. We have no current idea at all what we might ever think to encode past the "Astral Plane", but that doesn't mean you should ever assume UTF-32 is UCS-2 and fre…
You gave me enough doubt that I went and looked this up. > UTF-32 is a fixed-length encoding used to encode Unicode code points that uses exactly 32 bits per code point... The main advantage of UTF-32 is that the Unicode code points are directly indexed. Finding the Nth code point in a sequence of code points is a constant-time operation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTF-32 > The [UTF-32] Unicode encoding form that…
That "except" there is still doing a lot of work pointing out that UTF-32 is not exactly UCS-4, so that point still stands. There's no surrogate code points allowed in UTF-32 today, but again if you want to assume "future compatibility" you shouldn't assume that UTF-32 is UCS-4 and will never have surrogate codepoints. As I said, we don't know if that next "plane" will ever open up into UCS-8 (64-bit) encodings, but if you are assuming it will never open up you are making the exact same sorts of assumptions that Unicode 1.0 users made with UCS-2 and had to consequently fix a decade later.
(And some of those same applications would have to fix again if 64-bit encodings opened up, because like I said UTF-16 has a math bug that its surrogates can't encode there, though UTF-8 is fine, and UTF-16 may be the worst of all Unicode encodings in the long run, but its legacy lives on so much because of all the early bets on UCS-2 being the last word and "easiest" Unicode that turned out to be bad assumptions when the "astral plane" opened up.)