51–60 of 113 posts
Completely agree. The other problem I've seen with getting stuck on the same project for X years is that you'll have a very limited portfolio to show for it, unless you're working on side projects as well.
When people tell me that I should "do projects in my own free time to keep my skills sharp", it throws me into a fit of rage and makes me want to tear them a new one. Do you see any other professions having to do that in order to stay employable? Can you imagine lawyers having to practice law in their free time to "keep their skills sharp"? Can you imagine civil engineers having to draft plans for bridges and buildin…
Teachers / doctors / dentists all need to take courses to keep their skills up to date. Programming is no different. I don't think there is one profession where you aren't required to keep your skills up to date / put in extra time.
Software is a career requiring a much higher level of personal commitment than many other careers, while often not necessarily being better compensated.
I've done kernel implementation for 20 years, and this question is absolutely terrible -- unless the answer that one is looking for is an intelligent explanation of why this is such a terrible question. It's an awful question because the kernel may not be involved at all on a user-level call to malloc() (e.g., a caching allocator like libumem or a traditional allocator that needn't extend the break for a given alloca…
Technically speaking, that is undefined.
"If an invalid value has been assigned to the pointer, the behavior of the unary * operator is undefined...Among the invalid values for dereferencing a pointer by the unary * operator are a null pointer,..."[1]
[1]http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf page 79
I've done kernel implementation for 20 years, and this question is absolutely terrible -- unless the answer that one is looking for is an intelligent explanation of why this is such a terrible question. It's an awful question because the kernel may not be involved at all on a user-level call to malloc() (e.g., a caching allocator like libumem or a traditional allocator that needn't extend the break for a given alloca…
>what does "* ((int * )NULL)" do Technically speaking, that is undefined. "If an invalid value has been assigned to the pointer, the behavior of the unary * operator is undefined...Among the invalid values for dereferencing a pointer by the unary * operator are a null pointer,..."[1] [1] http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf page 79
I've done kernel implementation for 20 years, and this question is absolutely terrible -- unless the answer that one is looking for is an intelligent explanation of why this is such a terrible question. It's an awful question because the kernel may not be involved at all on a user-level call to malloc() (e.g., a caching allocator like libumem or a traditional allocator that needn't extend the break for a given alloca…
I've done kernel implementation for 20 years, and this question is absolutely terrible -- unless the answer that one is looking for is an intelligent explanation of why this is such a terrible question. It's an awful question because the kernel may not be involved at all on a user-level call to malloc() (e.g., a caching allocator like libumem or a traditional allocator that needn't extend the break for a given alloca…
It's pronounced "aches" for a reason.
I've done kernel implementation for 20 years, and this question is absolutely terrible -- unless the answer that one is looking for is an intelligent explanation of why this is such a terrible question. It's an awful question because the kernel may not be involved at all on a user-level call to malloc() (e.g., a caching allocator like libumem or a traditional allocator that needn't extend the break for a given alloca…
Is that an almost correct piece of code? What sort of situation would something like that come up in?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Teachers / doctors / dentists all need to take courses to keep their skills up to date. Programming is no different. I don't think there is one profession where you aren't required to keep your skills up to date / put in extra time.
As I've mentioned before, in a lot of professions it is paid and considered part of the job. If not, then at least it's regulated. We enjoy none of those benefits. Software is a career requiring a much higher level of personal commitment than many other careers, while often not necessarily being better compensated.
Isn't the level of personal commitment subjective though? What would your solution be?
I think it's hard for programming because there's such a diverse array of programmers (university educated based on data structures / algorithms vs self-taught that might not know those things). My recent interviews with Amazon tested my core CS knowledge but nothing like frameworks or anything. I suspect those things would matter more at startups / web shops (where I used to work).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that an almost correct piece of code? What sort of situation would something like that come up in?
Every hear of segfaults? They are almost always the result of de-referencing NULL.