Do you prefer local environments or cloud environments?

I think the major downside of having your important functionality in public cloud (usually not the case, but) is that when a major part of the cloud goes down (say, the previous Amazon issue), your services no longer (properly) work.
Of course, there's private cloud, hybrid cloud...
Pros and cons.

I find it weird getting countless rejections saying they prefer other candidates who are 'better'. What the fuck, is the market flooded with top tier talent or something? I already have an impressive resume and apparently it's not enough.

That's the market these days. Not even an interview. Straight out rejected.

:O... On modern displays, a browser pixel can span multiple display dots. Well, that sure demystifies layouts acting strange sometimes.

tmyk

Regarding coding style, would you rather prefer:

1) Mutating state
This one sounds intuitive and performant because you are working with only one memory segment in place. I think that if you are skilled enough to efficiently modify the state without bugs, then everything should be efficient and powerful.

2) Copying state and modifying the copy
This one seems counter-intuitive to me because it sounds like you are doubling the resources it takes to perform the operation

Funny enough - at least for React, Python and my experience at work - it seems approach 2 is gaining popularity. Does this also apply to C? I would think not. Hm.

https://youtube.com/watch/...

The more you know.

I knew about Hertz, but not about speed repetition causing a sinewave.

https://youtube.com/watch/...

The 'vibecoder' skit
:trying hard not to laugh:

https://youtube.com/watch/...

I wonder if this is A.I./manipulated. lol

Have you ever asked yourself: "Do I really want to be a dev?". Maybe one wants to be an artist, y'know.

!rant if(gym) { mood++; } // post-increment because it requires gym first

I'm starting to wonder if the modern job market has changed in such a way that they now require you to have Senior skills if you apply for a Senior position - the old 'apply anyway' does not seem to hold true anymore. This is the experience I have been getting from my latest interviews. If they ask for someone who's a guru in C#... well then, you better be the greatest living legend in it, and no less will do, neither any amount of sales talk.

It's just that; they're asking for real skill nowadays, obviously because the job market is going downwards again and companies are taking no risks... the effect is: either you're really good or we're not hiring you. That must also explain the lack of junior positions... I used to see much more of those around. Now it's all spammed with Senior in the title.

"You have 40 minutes to design this database" (job interview)

Coursera

"enroll for free $0"
1.4 million people enrolled

course given by Stanford
continue for $299 a month

lol.

If you want to know what real vibe coding looks like:
https://youtube.com/watch/...

That is a cool girl. lol

So you want a burnt out developer to show you enthusiasm of a college kid? Nice try, guys.

My job market feelings for today:
https://youtube.com/watch/...

DevRant Image upload not working...

Isn't it incredibly frustrating when they ask you to be proficient at things you haven't even worked with? I think this has got to be one of the most frustrating things as a developer, as I prefer to know and be skilled with things up front and not be dumped some tech onto me and 'here, figure it out'.

Of course, for those of us who have the deep fundamental skills in their fingertips, this isn't such a problem, and that's where I want to get.

It just hit me. Companies that badly want to use A.I. are really trying to cover for their mass incompetence.

It's hilarious when companies use Box because when someone left the company, you see their name as 'a previous collaborator'. It's sad, but yeah. lol

...or imagine if it's a startup with immature software - it might say 'NULL uploaded a document 3 years ago'. lmao

Rate your SQL skillz:

1: beginner
1a between 1 and 2
2: intermediate
2a between 2 and 3
3: advanced
3a between 3 and 4
4: expert
4a between 4 and 5
5: legendary

I'll start: 1a

!dev Applying to jobs is like solving those ground trap puzzles in videogames. lmao. Carefully make sure you solve each tile correctly... and from there you can apply the framework to vacancies.

Hey, I already gave tips on this one. ;p

- Do one thing at a time
- Limit your effort hours (say, keep it to work hours)
- (very important) Keep a steady, hefty pace. Don't study just one hour a day (if you can), study 3 hours per evening or so. The key is to keep it to a long consistency or your brain will just forget
- Have some fun after the effort hours
- Sleep enough (8 hours minimum)

Another learned job tip:
The way you present yourself matters a ton. People respect mystery, not transparency. You don't need to post every little job you did in the past, wide open. If they ask for it explicitly, sure, give them your job history, but don't put all your little jobs on your CV or you will look like shit and get insta-rejections. Instead, wrap them in a block of 'early jobs' or something.

Learned the hard way.

Git, git, gear! Wanna train with coach Frank?

When taking so many temp notes of quick thoughts that your text editor has 40 unsaved instances.
Of course, in time I transfer them to my permanent notes.

Rofl.

What programming feels like:
https://youtube.com/watch/...

Weird error message from webpage: "Hello, my name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my webpage. Prepare to die".

It's a Princess Bride parody...

Developers get creative (or bored) these days with error messages.. Yes, one of those again.

JavaScript keeps surprising me, or I'm just rushing. lol

class Group {
#group;

constructor(){
this.group = [];
return this.group;
}

add(item) {
// only if it isn't already a member
// value can be part of set only once
if(!this.has(item)) {
group.push(item);
}
}

has(item){
// return boolean: item member of group
for(let i=0; i<group.length; i++) {
if(group[i] === item) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
}

let group = new Group();
group.add(1);
console.log(group);

Error: group.add() is not a function
Why is group.add() not a function?
A.I. analysis:

1. Private field vs public field:
A private field #group can only be accessed as this.#group. But in the constructor, I wrote:
this.group = [];

This creates a new public field, unrelated to #group.

2. Returning from constructor:
return this.group;

In JavaScript, a constructor automatically returns this, which is the instance of the class. Returning this.group replaces the instance with the array. That’s why after new Group(), your variable group is just an array, not an instance of Group. Arrays don’t have the add method — hence the error.

3. Referencing group inside methods:
group.push(item);
Here group is not defined. You probably meant this.group (or this.#group if using the private field).

Note to self: in the magic of computer science, you must be precise. If I loosely define the black box, the result will have a chance of producing anomalies.. kind of like reality. lol

I'm sitting here realizing that Software Development and Computer Science in general, heck, STEM, is the most difficult skillset to endure because of the stress we go through as well when dealing with the workplace, especially the workplace.

I looked up how hard Computer Science is versus Advanced Physics and it is rated 40 vs. 80, the latter being doubly difficult. Now I got to thinking: Could it be us as developers are experiencing near-80 difficulty because of the stress we are put through to rush through deliveries at work? Maybe it's a 50. Hm, hm.

What a delight it must be (no sarcasm) to be able to research and perfect something for 20 years without people breathing down your neck about deadlines.. aaaahhh... lol.

Story:
Useful lesson I learned in a JavaScript book:

"Classes are abstract data types in the sense that they are a layer around the complexity (encapsulation). Their singular nature allows them to be reused without being rewritten everywhere.

A good analogy is thinking of classes as appliances; the complex circuitry and components that an appliance comprises of are made by different people than the abstract shell around these components, of which (another) team only needs to know which buttons to access which parts.
A class abstracts away the internal complexity (components) and only exposes a public interface (the buttons) that the user (yet another group, comparable to the consumer of the class) is going to use."

It reminds me of how Google uses the Facade pattern to only expose the search box and the button as its public interface and all the complex architecture is hidden away.

This helped clarify classes better for me.

!rant Lovely quote:

“There are two ways of constructing a software design: One
way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no
deficiencies, and the other way is to make it so complicated
that there are no obvious deficiencies.”
—C.A.R. Hoare, 1980 ACM Turing Award Lecture