Have you used Jira? It’s a memory guzzler

Kind of, though they honestly just do pretend immutability. Object references are still copied everywhere.

Forced to use copilot? Wtf?

I would quit, immediately.

Yep, senior Haskell developer here and I have had their recruiters hounding me many times, even though I have told them to fuck off again and again.

I always find it so funny that they chose Haskell. They are desperate to hire, but no one in the Haskell community actually wants to work for them. I’m in a discord server with a bunch of veteran Haskellers and everyone there won’t touch them with a 100ft pole.

Would be the most sane thing he’s ever done.

Not sure if serious or not, but yeah I use interactive rebases every day, many times a day (it’s nice for keeping a clean, logical history of atomic changes).

It’s very simple to recover if you accidentally do something you don’t intend (git rebase --abort if the rebase is still active, git reflog to find the commit before the rebase if it’s finished).

Never understood why this is such a trope. There’s very little you can’t recover in git (basically, only changes you never committed in the first place).

Yes, he is a dumbass, but frankly this is exactly what’s needed. More and more of his base having reality hit them in the face, complaining loudly, and fracturing his support.

Unless you’re writing Scala or something (which is probably the one exception to the rule), if you are using a language that supports OOP, you’re not really doing functional programming. Functional-esque features that have made their way into imperative languages like map are only a tiny fraction of the functional toolbox.

There’s a bunch of features you want in a language to do functional programming, and imperative languages don’t really have them, like purity by default (and consequently, an orientation towards values rather than references) ergonomic function composition, algebraic data types, pattern matching, support for treating everything as first class expressions/values, etc.

Perhaps this is presumptious (and I apologize in advance if so), but I’d wager you haven’t truly programmed in the functional paradigm. What imperative programmers tend to think of functional programming is very surface-level and not really reflective of what it actually is. It’s an entirely different beast from imperative programming. It requires a shift of your mindset and how you think about programs as a whole.

Source: Senior software engineer writing Haskell full time for the last 4 years. Will avoid OOP until my dying breath.

It basically does. It pretends to court functional programming while actually being really antithetical to it in basically every way. Guido Van Rossum has vocally expressed his dislike for functional programming (though I’d argue he actually doesn’t really know much about it).

For Haskell:

1. I’d say this is definitely a wtf. Tuples should have never been given Foldable instances and I’d immediately reject any code that uses it in code review.

2. I actually didn’t know, so TIL. Not surprising since common wisdom is that a lot of the type class instances for Doubles are pretty weird/don’t make a lot of sense. Just like in any language, floating point needs special care.

3. This is jjust expected syntax and not really a wtf at all. It’s very common for languages to require whitespace around operators.

4. Agreed as wtf, the NegativeLiterals should be on by default. Just would be a pretty significant breaking change, unfortunately

5. Not a wtf… What would you expect to happen? That operation is not well-defined in any language

Mutating function arguments is pretty wtf to begin with.

Wanting them to work is reasonable, but complaining about the lack of anti-cheat makes no sense. The problem is the insistence on client-side anti-cheat to begin with.

It’s implied, because anything would behave the same.

Not that client-side anti-cheat makes any sense anyway.

File-based navigation is often inefficient anyway (symbolic navigation is much better when you can), but if you do need it, that’s what fuzzy finders are for. Blows any mouse-based navigation out of the water.

The only time a visual structure is useful is when you are actually just interested in learning how things are structured for whatever reason, but for that task, tree works just fine anyway.

Or just, you know, sit to pee like a civilized person.

Generally the Rust Book, even in comparison to most languages, is considered to be very good and it is the expected way to learn the language. It won’t teach you everything, but it does give you a very solid foundation. The Rust community has put considerable effort into their learning materials.

I don’t think you’ve paid enough attention. Back when ChatGPT first launched, they were treated as saints.

The negative opinions have corresponded with public sentiment souring towards them in general (this did happen quite quickly, however).

The people doing software engineering without such a degree in the US are definitely in the minority, so there’s not much point to the hand-wringing generally speaking.

Not sure why you’re out here defending hugely unpopular behavior.