Even in C++98, it is possible to write a local function equivalent like this:

void foo() {
  struct { void operator()() {
    printf("I'm local, yo!");
  }} localFunction;

  localFunction();
}

However, the anonymous struct cannot be used as a template argument, severely limiting the usefulness of this construct.

Although I don't think it qualifies as best of 2012, since it's updated just once in 2012, it's still very good. I also didn't know it updated, since it hasn't in years. Thanks for the heads up!

The art is done by the artist (David Hellman) who did the art for Braid (which was right after the comic stopped updating).

On the château?

Please put your accent back on, Mr. Exposé...

Personally, as a player-turned-developer, I find it difficult to enjoy games past a certain point without the opportunity to participate in their creation.

There is a Wikipedia article about this issue:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scunthorpe_problem

"The problem was named after an incident in 1996 in which AOL's dirty-word filter prevented residents of the town of Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire, England from creating accounts with AOL, because the town's name contains the substring cunt.[1] Years later, Google's filters apparently made the same mistake, preventing residents from searching for local businesses that included Scunthorpe in their names.[2]"

There is also a stub article about a specific instance of the replacement effect: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medireview

Sweet. This means I no longer have to worry about losing my thumb drive - I'd just plug myself in!

Now, where should I put the pr0n folder...

I see what you did there.

I think you've nailed it. Pity I'm out of mod points.

I know plenty of 'geeks', myself included, who hate [i]the way CGI is sometimes (ab)used[/i], but not CGI itself, not across the board. There is a key difference there that should not be oversimplified.

In almost any context, there is room for appreciable value in both the high-tech approach as well as the raw, "old school" approach(es). It's great that C is reviving old approaches. There's been a general retro lean lately, but still plenty of room.

The more I spend time watching older films, the more I'm saddened by the eventuality that I am going to exhaust the cache of (decent) films that do certain things which are unlikely to be repeated in quite the same way (e.g. Lean's epics). So, things like this are a welcome sight, even if they rarely have the same feel when produced now as they did 30-100 years ago (which is also okay, because they have their own, unique feel instead; something new to bring to the table).

Burn-down charts are supposed to measure time remaining, not time spent working. They are most useful for avoiding situations where you suddenly realize that the project is behind schedule, at least short term. They are also intended for the team as a whole, not individuals (emphasis on the team is one of the core principles of Agile).

If you're tracking time worked as part of scrum, you're (probably) doing it wrong.

I think you are referring to the Technological Singularity:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

You are incredible. I don't believe you.