I think the responder means that duplicate code is usually easy to refactor into single methods. Typically I see copy pasted code that is changed just a little bit. However much of a duplicated function can be broken into smaller functions and the redundant code removed in favor of calling into the functions. Often what is left then becomes easier to reason about and refactor accordingly. I love the PRs that I make which delete more code than I add but still manage to add functionality. It doesn’t happen often but it’s fun when it does.

It was originally meant as a better JavaScript and it was. It failed when none of the other browsers expressed interest in supporting it. It languished for a while and then was taken up by the Flutter team. At the time Flutter took it up it was somewhere around the level of Java 8 in features but not quite on par. Since then it’s seen some massive improvements to the type system and language. It’s completely null sound, not just null safe like Kotlin. It recently got records/tuples and one of the more capable pattern matching syntaxes I’ve ever seen in a functional imperative hybrid language. The next stable version of dart will introduce a compiler macro system that is very promising. The syntax isn’t always the prettiest due to it trying to not totally break old code. I do think that it offers a wide range of modern language features that competes heavily with Swift and Kotlin in the mobile space.

The only things JSON has over xml is that it’s easier to write a parser for it and the format is less verbose and less complicated. There are extensions to JSON that can add features that xml has and the JSON spec doesn’t have. Overall the xml spec is bigger and has more features but that also makes it overkill for many of the cases that it would be used in.

Claims top 5 and offers zero evidence and very little content beyond what an LLM might write.

Or it is just corporate greed. Samsung would love to position something that is just okay into a premium price tier and not have to pay Intel. Sure they’re going to pay Qualcomm instead but you can bet that Qualcomm is giving some great introductory prices to their early partners.

Any program written for the .net clr ought to just run out of the box. There’s also an x64 to ARM translation layer that works much like Apple’s Rosetta. It will run the binary through a translation and execute that. I have one of the windows arm dev units. It works relatively well except on some games from my limited experience.

The logo is closer to do ith ub. It might summon an orcish demon patron if said with the right spell components.

True. I’m not an expert here but I always thought that fan fiction could only co-exist with copyrighted material if the author wasn’t benefiting financially from the derivative work. Someone else taking it and selling it seems like more a target for the rights holders of the original work.

I have one of the Voltera dev kits. It’s not bad. It probably runs at almost the same speed as the m1 mini or maybe closer to the dev kit. The x86 emulation is decent. It doesn’t do well when running old games like Age of Empires 2 HD. For doing light development it is okay. The nice thing is that it is far more efficient than anything Intel puts out. Whether Qualcomm can keep the performance per watt to levels like the M series chips remains to be seen.

People shouldn’t be down voting you just because they disagree and hate php. I’ve read that it has come along way in the last 10 years or so. People really like Laravel too. I wouldn’t put it on my list of recommendations personally but I get why someone might.

The facts are that large companies rarely innovate anything major. They tend to buy up smaller companies that have taken the risk and succeeded. Look at Google and Microsoft and tons of others. It’s a problem with growing big. The forces that make a company a successful scrappy little startup die out in the name of organizational efficiency. If you want to know what Apple innovated you have to look at what they did in the 70s or extend your criteria to companies they have bought.

People laughed their assess off at Bill Gates’s epic failed demo of usb on windows 95. Live on stage he plugged in a peripheral and the machine blue screened. No way in hell would Jobs have taken that risk.

The real crime is marketing the driver assist capability under the name autopilot when it is anything but that.

More like banking and finance. Many of them have shipped jobs out of New York and elsewhere to cities in the DFW area like Plano.

That’s already happening. What’s more is that training an llm on llm generated content degrades the llm for some reason. It’s becoming a mess.

Keep in mind these things don’t really know anything. They’re good at saying things that seem to fit the situation because that’s how they’re trained. They are like that person you may know that thinks he knows everything and will just say stuff that sounds right to them. The only difference is the ai is a lot more practiced than the human. Google’s llm may have some filtering done on the output to at least make sure that all of the books it recommends are real though it wouldn’t surprise me if there’s a fake one in the list somewhere. These things are prone to “hallucinations” which some lawyers found out the hard way.

Yeah, it’s a bit on the extreme side for me. 10-20 is what I prefer. I find that if I follow that rule the code is easy to come back to later because the things a function does are more clearly defined. I can look at a higher level function and it’s filled with function calls like readX, createY and doThis. I don’t have to look at as many blocks of code and try to remember what the intent was.

It’s a highly opinionated book but it is full of good advice that in my opinion goes too far. Using a metaphor here, I think he wanted to get people to the moon but knew that he needed to give guidance to get to mars because people would look at whatever he wrote and think it’s too much.

The book has several chapters discussing the SOLID design principles and showing how to apply them. You’ll be a better programmer for reading it. “Uncle Bob” the person can be a bit problematic so I don’t particularly like telling people to give him money. Try getting the book from the library or a second hand store. There are also videos out there of him speaking at conferences that may give a good taste of the material. He has a blog too.

There is a school of thought that break and continue are just goto in disguise. It helps that these two are more limited in scope than goto and can be considered less evil. If you read the book Clean Code by Robert Martin (it should be required reading for all developers), you’ll see that he doesn’t like functions to be very long. I think his rule is no more than 4 lines. I try to keep mine around 10 or less with a hard stop at 20 unless it can’t be avoided because I’m switching over a large enum or something. If you put your loops into functions then you can just use return instead of break.

I did have a discussion with a teacher once about my use of early returns. This was when I had returned to school after many years as a professional programmer. I pointed out that my code has far less indentation than theirs and was simpler because of it and that it is common in the world outside of education. I got all of my points back he has deducted.

You’re going to hear some good and bad advice from your teachers. Once you have a job check out what the good developers are doing and just follow them.

The answer is always “laid off”. They don’t usually verify because the former employer will only verify that you worked there and your start and end date. They don’t want to open themselves up to slander lawsuits.