I'm honestly impressed by how...well it works. Considering it's building an entire, totally custom Linux distro from scratch it requires a surprisingly little amount of hand-holding.
I agree. I don't understand how people prefer buildroot. Buildroot feels like an adhoc system of glued together Makefiles, whereas yocto actually feels like it was built for purpose.
Yocto feels like a ball of mud duct taped together, but thankfully has good documentation. It reminds me of CMake. Buildroot is nice for relatively simple situations. Nixos is arguably better than both.
Their idiosyncrasies may look similar, but CMake has a much stronger skeleton of core algorithms and data structures for a build system than Bitbake. Specifically, as I mentioned in another reply, Bitbake does not model dependencies correctly. CMake does.
Can you elaborate a bit on the dependency-handling topic? I've always thought that Bitbake's dependency handling worked pretty well. It only has package-level granularity, but is quite good within that context.
Bitbake doesn't model all changes that affect packages, so after certain changes, some packages that should be rebuilt, aren't. It is especially prone to happen when changing Bitbake variables (example: MACHINE_FEATURES), and these are a quite common way to change things about the image being built.
My main motivation for impactfulness is just making my job more pleasant: Nothing is more soul-sucking than fixing the same kinds of issues over and over because the powers that be are convinced they're doing it right, and you're the one stuck fixing the issues they create.
My main motivation is for my resume to look good for my n+1 job. I don’t always know when I’m going to be looking or whether it’s by force or by choice. But I always want to be prepared
It says it checks whether the time going up is shorter than the time going down to keep people from throwing it off a building. So I have a feeling it wouldn't work... Especially since part of their intention is for people to break expensive phones they bought only to show off while trying to show off even more.
Don't think you can calculate that based on acceleration, you are at zero g the entire time you are in flight. I suspect it's looking for the acceleration peak when you throw it up, as opposed to just dropping it from a high building.
I built a lot of weird 'inventions' in university, such as an airsoft sentry gun to keep squirrels away from the garden. I was also in a student club.
I don't think any project specifically made potential employers say 'wow, we definitely have to hire this guy', but I think having actual experience doing stuff and demonstrating an interest for the field goes a long way towards landing you those first couple of jobs.
What's nifty about an e-bike is that they're cheap enough to co-exist with your car. I still have my trusty Honda, but I also do many trips by bike now. I fill up with gas way less often, don't have to deal with traffic and parking, and get a bit of exercise to boot.
> Does it infect C/C++ programmers who've dared to sample it once, turning them into noisy advocates, a la addictive drugs or parasitic fungi?
It definitely did that to me. I remember trying out Rust and was amazed at how much abuse I'd put up with from C++ for all these years. Now I just want to try out Rust in a large enterprise project to see if it will just be replaced with a different kind of abuse...
I can sympathize, but keep in mind most professions expect you to commit to a certain number of hours of continuing education. Often you can convince your employer to let you do this during work hours (or even pay for it!), but not always.
Continuing education credits is pretty far from "bring in a hobby project for code review for this interview".
Is there even a CE credit available for coding up a hobby project (and who from)? Completion of a course, attending a lecture, attending a lunch & learn, etc. are the CE credits I am familiar with (spanning a few different professional bodies).
Sometimes you can declare "self-learning", depending on the order.
But anyways, that's not really my point: My point is just that in professions it's not uncommon to be expected to perform some kind of extracurricular activities related to your job. Often software "engineers" aren't members of a professional order, but I'd argue that the idea still applies. Tbh learning by working on a hobby project is way more appealing to me than watching some PowerPoint presentation...
I don’t understand your view. How do you improve your skill in the craft ? Or learn new technologies ? You wait for your employer to tell you to learn something ? That’s a sure fire way to always be behind the curve.
I don't understand how you reached that conclusion.
If it is a personal interest or hobby, I do it on my own time. If it is something required for work, I do it on company time. If there is a lot of overlap, I do it whenever.
Other than that, I learn and improve like any other person does.
Continuing education credits, which is what started this subthread, is something required by the professional body that my company wants me to be a member of. So they happen on company time and dime.
Employers don't require their employees to be members of a professional order because they think professional orders are nifty- It's because certain jobs are only legally allowed to be performed by a member of said order. If you were a dentist and ran your own clinic, you'd still need to be a member of a professional order (at least in Canada and the US afaik) to practice dentistry legally, which would come with obligations outside of your usual working hours.
Software engineering exists in a sort of gray area where you can often be a professional software engineer without having to be a member of any order, which is great in many ways. But I feel like one could argue that the informal expectation of software engineers to care about software outside of their work is similar to what is expected in other professions with more rigid governing bodies.
>Employers don't require their employees to be members of a professional order because they think professional orders are nifty
I didn't say they do it for nifty-ness. At risk of repeating myself again: if it is a requirement of my position, I get my employer to pay for it. Why it is a requirement doesn't matter to me.
If you want to pay for and do continuing education things on your own time and dollar, I'm not going to stop you.
>But I feel like one could argue that the informal expectation of software engineers to care about software
I didn't say I don't care. I just have plenty of other things that I care about that take priority when I am not working (spending time with my family, friends, doing other hobbies, etc.).
