Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Sure! (Score 1) 192

The Four Programmers Sketch (Four old programmers sit reminiscing about the "good old days" of coding.)

Programmer 1: Aye, kids these days have it easy. Writing in Python, JavaScript—high-level languages that do everything for ‘em. Back in my day, we had to write in C!

Programmer 2: C? You were lucky! We had to code in assembly—punching in opcodes by hand!

Programmer 3: Assembly? Luxury! We only had ones and zeroes, flipping switches on the front panel to program each instruction!

Programmer 4: Ones and zeroes? Pfft. We only had zeroes! And we were grateful for ‘em!

You programmed with a keyboard, luxury! We manipulated the bits on a breadboard.

Comment Re:Syntax (Score 1) 3

The syntax of some of these examples seems more verbose and harder to follow than just writing the XML or JSON itself, especially the anchor examples. Aside from that, XML to JSON conversion exists, though with limitations, seemingly the same ones, such as no comments in JSON so instead you're adding an additional key. Might as well just write one or the other and convert, especially because libxmq is nearly JSON anyway.

This seems to be an effort in part at minification which in JSON can be achieved by other efforts such as shortening the keys and having an agreed map on both sides. If they're going for readability, I'm not sure if this is more readable than JSON. It might appear more readable than XML. I look forward to this standard becoming the 15th universal standard.

The discussion forum on GitHub is inactive at the moment with 1 discussion about windows. As for adding in comments to JSON that's probably not required if both parties understand the payload being exchanged and as you mentioned can easily be worked around by adding in a "_comments" key/value pair.

As I read it with the style chosen, it seems to be more like JavaScript or Java (given the Authors background). This seems reads like someone who wants the features of XML added into JSON, but didn't want to call it JSONX. Having just googled this, the name is already taken by IBM for JSON as XML.

Submission + - AWS will pay devs to verify Rust standard library because of 7,500 unsafe functi (devclass.com)

sean-it-all writes: AWS will pay developers to verify RUST standard library. How much is unclear at this stage. The issue stems from unsafe operations in RUST standard library where access to operating system can cause issues such as a null reference exception.

"The issue AWS highlights is that even if developers use only safe code, most applications still depend on the Rust standard library. AWS states that there are approximately 7.5K unsafe functions in the Rust Standard Library and notes that 57 âoesoundness issuesâ and 20 CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures) have been reported in the last three years. The cloud giant also claimed that âoethe rate of change of the standard libraries is faster and more unsound.â "

"The Rust Foundation says that there is a financial reward tied to each challenge, and that the âoechallenge rewards committee is responsible for reviewing activity and dispensing rewards.â How much will be paid though is not stated."

Comment Re:Wow (Score 1) 172

Basically this would be why and the corporate real estate price tanking (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-30/push-for-staff-return-to-office-after-working-from-home/103148260). There's occasional serendipity moments where we're working on a similar thing, but these are already covered in weekly meetings with the people in the same role.

Comment Re:The problem is the consequences. (Score 1) 157

Well you don't enforce the policies on the 10x employees as heavily like return to work.
HR also knows that retention is important with those employees now (in theory).
The goal is to always pay the bare minimum for any performing employee.
If we wanted truth the salaries and performance would be made public but someone I suspect that won't happen.
The report won't be fed back to the engineers. It's for management only typically.
If you do see one of these reports you'll understand why they don't share them.
If we're talking about the Pareto Principle then yes, 80% are less productive than 20%. of those 20% some are more efficient than others. https://www.investopedia.com/t...
Paying the low performers less, like management or engineers. Because the engineers may still be the 20% that are productive in the company.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Aww, if you make me cry anymore, you'll fog up my helmet." -- "Visionaries" cartoon

Working...