I can express this easily in python as well, and honestly given reasonable functions in C/C++, I could do so there. A lot of complexity in code is entirely dependent on how clearly you decide to make your code, and where you decide to provide helper functions.

For example, I'd probably do something like this in python:

for item in filter(lambda x: x.Checked, styleMenu):
    if item.Style not in currentFont.ProvidedStyles:
        item.Checked = false

Contrary to what a lot of purists say, I disagree that syntax is unimportant. I think it's very important. But I also think that where the syntax of a language fails you, you can (typically) make up a lot by writing helpful functions. For example, here's a stab at this in C++. Please forgive my early adoption of the auto keyword, I agree that the syntax of iterating over containers in stl is pretty verbose.

if (currentFont) {
    auto items = styleMenu.items();
    for (auto it = items.begin(); it != items.end(); ++it) {
        if (!it->IsChecked()) continue;
        if (!currentFont->ProvidesStyle(it->Style)) {
            it->SetChecked(false);
        }
    }
}

Language choice definitely matters, and many new languages offer high level abstractions that just make coding easier and more productive. But old languages can, for some cost, be made more easily readable, too.

As a bit of a sidebar, you pay more than a "mild penalty" for using Ruby as opposed to C/C++

Comparison

You know, Palin is very familiar with Russian Roulette, primarily because Russia is her neighbor.

That's just false. All non-Live games work in offline mode in some capacity. It's part of logo testing.

According to this article, ~40% of class action lawsuits are dismissed, and virtually all others are settled. It's so rare, this article is ABOUT the novelty of a class action lawsuit going to trial.

That whooshing sound you hear all the time? That's every joke ever told rushing past you without any sort of comprehension on your part.

Brainfuck, whitespace, etc? These are all jokes. You're never intended to use them at all.

There are companies that do this. I'm fortunate enough to work for one.

It could, or it could not.

The question is whether it will save you at least the overhead, where the overhead is a scrum master + 6.25% of the total project. Let's call that 10% total overhead.

If SCRUM doesn't save you 10%, it wasn't worth it--you should've used something else or nothing at all.

I see. On your PC that you bought from Best Buy 11 years ago, you were able to have your shows recorded to a digital medium from any arbitrary analog source? You could both watch a show and record something else, simultaneously? You had software that utilized a control scheme that realized you were human and it took you some time from the time you saw what you wanted to watch to when you pressed the button and adjusted accordingly? You had software that kept up with the shows you were watching, scheduling recordings based on a priority list, adjusted recording times when schedule changes occurred and warned you about conflicts when you recorded new shows? And you managed to do all of this for ~$450 (with no future expenditure required)?

Calling all of that innovation trivial is remarkably disingenuous.

What you're talking about is not particularly a good idea though, and would be done only by specific programs where they know that they need to have very large (> 2GB) data sets available, in memory, all at once, and that they are to be deployed on 32-bit systems--and was written entirely by masochists.

In order to take advantage of this functionality, the application would need to manage its own page table. Or instead of doing so, they could continue to allow the OS to manage it for them by either:

1) Targeting a 64-bit platform (easiest)
2) Providing a multi-process solution where each process provides access to no more than 2 Gb each, and then use a handle-based approach to access data in other processes.

Either of these solutions is both easier to implement (the first case in fact is trivial, but reduces your potential market footprint) than managing your own page table with the OS--which is error prone. Oh, and note that the second solution will take advantage of something else you're likely trying to do: scale versus the number of cores.

I don't suffer the lag you're talking about. I run a gtx260+ at 2560x1600 with 8xAA and every option turned up. I'm usually at 60, and never below 30.

I don't get network lag either, except when my cable is acting up. I run 25-mans and have no problems in Dalaran even when it's packed.

Moreover, I find the graphics and effects in WoTLK to be quite good. Sure they're not EQ2, but that's not the art style they're going for, so that's fine with me.

Shrug, to each their own I suppose.

Usually at the end of the interview, I ask if I can speak with someone I'll be directly working with. Then I ask them questions like:

How do you like the work you're doing? Do you find it engaging and interesting? Is there a lot of red-tape to getting things done?

And my personal favorite. "What is your least favorite thing about this place?"

Answers like "my boss" or "work environment" are typically red flags to me. I'm looking for companies that wow me, though.

Oh you newbies, reading articles before submitting them.

Why would anyone think that paying by the mile would reduce the amount I'm driving?

I don't go on long jaunts around the town just for the hell of it, I go because I need to get somewhere, or pick something up.

So pretty much what this would do is either be a savings for me--because it'd be less than my buffet style policy--or it'd be more expensive for me. I'm guessing that the majority of people, myself included, would fall into the latter category.