No I’m Spartacus.

It really forks the llamas ass!

Fortunately, they aren’t being asked to do that. All the rust team was requesting was metadata about the call signatures so that they could have a grasp on expected behavior.

A bunch of people that either failed to understand the value of the moderation system or are just crybabies about being expected to follow the rules answering here.

It is easy to use and not nearly as toxic as most of the internet will claim. Research your question, ask clearly, include the code you attempted for a minimal reproduction, and include debugging details. If you don’t do those things, you are the problem, not the people closing your questions.

I use it often per month.

Like all other patterns, it can be done well or done poorly. I’ve experienced both with monorepos. The pain is greater when it is painful. But if the contribution, build, and release procedures are well designed and clearly documented it can also be nice.

There are no absolutes, and most of these “myths” are at least true to some extent. Much like any paradigm (worse is better, whitebox testing, lbyl vs eafp, etc), none are universally best. And all are helpful to know about.

Even:

No

Would be better than nothing.

You may want to add a 👍 to the request.

Yes true, but people that don’t know what terraform is are probably not the target audience of the beta to initial GA release announcement. The website should make clear what it does for anybody stumbling into the project, and if it doesn’t that should be improved.

The primary audience here will be people already using or about to use terraform that prefer an open source license and have been waiting for this replacement.

This is to me an question lacking very precise requirements. But you say you need batches, so it sounds like option one (batches) is the only option that satisfies the “batches” requirement.

There was something like that on Reddit but I can’t remember the sub. I haven’t seen one here. The best way to get reviews of open source is via contributions to larger projects. That of course doesn’t answer your question directly but is worth noting.

I’d recommend joining some discord or matrix servers for the language you work in or likeminded folk. They tend to have channels for that, and some have really helpful communities.

eta: I just checked my local instance and saw a community with very few subs and zero posts called /c/reviewmycode. Somebody has to post first.

100%, but my understanding is that most often applies to fields of engineering outside of computer science like mechanical, chemical, structural engineering etc. But there are licensing bodies for achieving Professional Engineer of FE in some cases for CS.

I am not a lawyer but I presume most laws apply to claims of such certifications rather than job titles. In either case most people don’t pick their own job titles. Just don’t put PE, after your name, same as you should not just randomly throw BSN or MD unless you have a registered licensure.

I rarely read comments in code, that is from within source code anyway. I of course write comments explaining the behavior of public facing interfaces and otherwise where they serve to generate documentation, but very rarely otherwise. And I use that generated documentation. So in a roundabout way I do read comments but outside of the code base.

For instance I might use godoc to get a general idea of components but if I’m in the code I’ll be reading the code instead.

As others have said, your code generally but not always should clearly express what it does. It is fine to comment why you have decided to implement something in a way that isn’t immediately clear.

I’m not saying others don’t read comments in code; some do. I just never find myself looking at docs in code. The most important skill I have cultivated over the decades has been learning to read and follow the actual code itself.

Poorly defined nomenclature. Simple as that. I’m an “automation engineer”, have had many other titles, but anytime I write what I do, like LinkedIn or such, I write “programmer”, because it is simple, descriptive, and I like it. I’m old, but I used to like ”hacker” until it came to imply nefarious programming.

In general it should not be checked in, but as with everything there are exceptions. If you need it to be deterministic and evaluate all changes to the generated code it can be useful; precisely for the reason you site in opposition. A small change in your build environment can change what was generated. If that isn’t diffed against preceding versions I think we could contrive cases where that would be an issue. Seems sufficient to me to caution that there are always exceptions.

I can’t believe there isn’t more love for this here. I have used and loved many of the fonts here but Victor Mono is unparalleled in my view. Legible, open source, superb keming, cursive italics, ligatures or not, and very consistent across all faces. The champ in my book.

Doesn’t make much sense to judge a program by its underlying language. While I don’t enjoy writing Python much anymore for several reasons it can produce perfectly fine applications. Mercurial is one such example.

So already not imperative. I hope the model writes better message than you.

I have no advice, but I can say that having a copy of K&R C in the house when I was a boy had a big impact on me. That was the 80’s but the book is just as relevant these days.

I was unclear for the sake of brevity. I LOVE Rust, but I regularly get knocked out of the zone by it, which reminds me I’m programming. That is purely due to my lack of experience with it. I suspect if my chops were as good as with some other languages I’d be having more fun but I’m still wrestling with the compiler quite a bit.

Also, my Go environment and editor config are just better, so I need to get my nvim config up to ship shape for Rust.

In summary, skill issue.