It is more of a “For typical cards, expect very competitive options from AMD. If you want top performance, buy Nvidia.”
In theory it allows them to focus more on the cards that actually get bought, and thus they could make those cards better products.
As the great operation begins.
we think you’d be best with a bigger team with a better support network
Sounds like they think you’re not independent enough for the position. If it is a small team, they might need someone who can immediately start being productive, while they think you will need more coaching to get up to speed.
No need to drag any disabilities into this.
Any liquid is drinkable, some even more than once!
That’s really useful to know. Thank you for sharing!
It would also be very hard to compete with products that are this mature. Linux, Windows, and macOS have been under development for a long time, with a lot of people. If you create a new OS, people will inevitably compare your new immature product with those mature products. If you had the same resources and time, then maybe your new OS would beat them, but you don’t. So at launch you will have less optimizations, features, security audits, compatibility, etc., and few people would actually consider using your OS.
That is true, but from a human perspective it can still seem non-deterministic! The behaviour of the program as a whole will be deterministic, if all inputs are always the same, in the same order, and without multithreading. On the other hand, a specific function call that is executed multiple times with the same input may occasionally give a different result.
Most programs also have input that changes between executions. Hence you may get the same input record, but at a different place in the execution. Thus you can get a different result for the same record as well.
That exact version will end up making “true” false any time it appears on a line number that is divisible by 10.
During the compilation, “true” would be replaced by that statement and within the statement, “__LINE__” would be replaced by the line number of the current line. So at runtime, you end up witb the line number modulo 10 (%10). In C, something is true if its value is not 0. So for e.g., lines 4, 17, 116, 39, it ends up being true. For line numbers that can be divided by 10, the result is zero, and thus false.
In reality the compiler would optimise that modulo operation away and pre-calculate the result during compilation.
The original version constantly behaves differently at runtime, this version would always give the same result… Unless you change any line and recompile.
The original version is also super likely to be actually true. This version would be false very often. You could reduce the likelihood by increasing the 10, but you can’t make it too high or it will never be triggered.
One downside compared to the original version is that the value of “true” can be 10 different things (anything between 0 and 9), so you would get a lot more weird behaviour since “1 == true” would not always be true.
A slightly more consistent version would be
((__LINE__ % 10) > 0)
I’m in IT in the financial industry. There is indeed still a ton of COBOL around.
I like your optimism, but no, they are actually serious.
Sadly, yes. On the off chance you speak Dutch, here is a fact-checking article on that exact ad. I know it’s a weird thing to link articles in uncommon languages, but I came across that article recently and thought it really provided a lot of context, so I’m afraid it’s the best source I have. You can always run it through a translator too :-)
Our eyes and brains don’t perceive still images or movement in the same way as a computer. There is no simple analogy between our perception and computer graphics.
I’ve read that some things can be perceived at 1000 fps. IIRC, it was a single white frame shown for 1ms between black frames. Of course most things you won’t be able to perceive at that speed, but it certainly isn’t as simple as 30 fps!
You want to translate COBOL to another language? That exists as a commercial product! The complexity is not the syntax though, it is the environment and subsystems surrounding the code. A lot of COBOL is designed for mainframe systems, and emulating a mainframe is complex.
You also end up with code that is still written as if it were COBOL. The syntax for COBOL is the easy part and that is all you can easily replace. Afterwards you’re still stuck with the way of working and mindset, both of which are quite peculiar.
The company I work for recently looked at all of this, and we decided not to translate our code.
One of the arguments that gets used is that the employees should look neutral. For example, if you want to get your gender changed you might not be comfortable with someone who is visibly associated with a religion that disproves of gender changes.
With my professional experience in COBOL, I can honestly say I’m not surprised at all!
Wouldn’t the simplest explanation be that the left side of the bed should be lowered a little?
DocFx could do what you’re looking for. You would write your stuff in markdown and it generates an interactive and customizable site.