Yeah making this into a man vs woman thing is stupid, I took the original post just as a person saying “people can have different kinds of intelligence, everything should be respected”

Your issues with programming don’t really seem related to programming, more of personal ones. Like for example, if you “don’t have the time for debugging anymore”, why would you have the time to figure out why your clay pot you made came out crooked?

I personally look around what the landscape looks like now and 20 years ago when I started it, and honestly, I can’t see thaaat much different for programming by yourself. Most changes occured in the interaction part of it, not quite knowing if you’re speaking with a human or a LLM. But research and learning still works the same way, maybe a bit more noise, but that had to be filtered out before as well, there was already so much stupidity 20 years ago.

Ok, let me rephrase, “it’s quite obviously more profitable”

You’re right. It’s not about the code though, it’s about the interaction with the individual submitting the code. It is natural for humans to want to use language that is meant for communication between humans to actually reach humans.

I’m not talking about the work contributors do, obviously that is invaluable.

But if you do a review, and you see that a function should be extracted at one point to avoid code duplication, is it really faster to tell the contributor that a function needs to be extracted there, compared to just extracting it yourself as you see it?

The value of a review is collaborative truth finding and learning. If there is an LLM on the other end, that’s just not happening.

That is just mostly wrong. Around 90% of the time, when you do a review, just fixing the issue that you found is much faster than explaining the issue and saying what needs to be done instead.

Reviews plainly are for educating the contributor to what constitutes “non-shit”(using your terminology) code on the repo. If that wasn’t the case, you could just not do a review and just change the code, without any interaction at all. Why would you communicate the change that needs to be done otherwise?

Rarely of course, something is so complicated that it actually takes more time to come up with the right code than do a review. But that is only a rare thing.

It’s quite obviously cheaper to not make it replaceable, otherwise they would do it globally. Companies are not that spiteful when it comes to money. The battery is probably already theoretically replaceable by repair shops with special tool or whatever, there was just an opening in the hull missing. So it’s likely just one or two pieces that have to be manufactured differently, the rest can stay the same.

Not YouTube, Soulseek. Nicotine frontend. Use a VPN.

The inane thing is being able to skip semicolons. Exactly, why should anyone bother with that. We wouldn’t have this conversation. So yes, this is valid criticism of JavaScript, it’s not a very important one at all, but still.

There are languages that compile into JS, might be worth to look at that. I like Clojurescript, but others are also good.

If you desire to interpret my comment as “shitting on people”, that is your prerogative. However, that is not how I meant it.

Thinking about things is great, and that opinion is actually contained in my comment, if you look closely: I want people to think, just not about things that aren’t really worth it.

The article is great, thinking about this in general is great, you just don’t want your future to be spent making decisions about where to place semicolons, that is not a beneficial use of one’s time. Without that thinking about where to place semicolons, you’re free to think about more useful topics.

To expand on this: Ideally you would work in a language you didn’t have these inane rules about semicolons, like the article is obviously good and correct, but it’s just not something that anyone should have to think about, it doesn’t lead to better programs.

It entirely depends on what you want the user experience to be like, and what ecosystem you choose.

So, no idea, give exact specifications.

Tl;dr: just put a semicolon at the end, and you never need to think, this is just not really worth it

Custom domain from my ISP.

20 MB limit where? Not on my email inbox.

which would just about kill mj love for programming

How is the expectation of coding fast killing your love for programming, but stopping programming altogether and letting an AI do it is not?

It’s interesting that so many people are able to do this. For me, I’d just rather lose my job than do something I fundamentally disagree with. If I didn’t, I would just be so extremely unhappy that I couldn’t function anyway.

Not bashing you, just pondering the differences.

You can just ask to be pegged, many women are happy to do it nowadays.

Not necessarily. A car by itself does not have a big carbon footprint at all, the problem with cars is that basically everyone has one, uses it for everything, and gets a new one every X years.

I drive a small car that I own since 2008, at that point it was already used, and it has 85000 km on it. If everyone of my age and up did that and drove so little, we’d have like 20-100 times less carbon footprint from cars.

It wouldn’t even make sense for me to upgrade to an electric car. Yes, it’d use less and greener fuel, but the amount of carbon it’d cost to produce probably wouldn’t “break even” until soooo many years in the future, maybe even after I die, at which point it’d even be a bad investment, carbon-wise.

So, like almost anything, it depends.