• vivendi@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    5 天前

    You should also really be using the latest chainsaw model with new safety features, but your workplace swears by the gas guzzling piece of shit from 1996

    • Blass Rose@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 天前

      I loved when my IDE would warn me that my code wasn’t deterministic unless I used c++11 or newer compilers because previous versions technically didn’t define how it should work, so every compiler handled it differently.

      And all the times I had to specify C++11 because it had features I needed, and suddenly it was a huge headache because the testing pipeline wasn’t REALLY compatible, it just said it was, and then handed it off to manual review. Something I didn’t know until 6 months after I started using it…

    • mmddmm@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      5 天前

      The new safety features all break down under stress and make the tool as safe as the 1996 piece as soon as you put them in a dangerous environment.

      Also, both the new and the 1996 pieces have hidden explosives that were placed there by the new tooling used to build them. Nobody will tell you where they are, you should know that already. Don’t hit them.

      • vivendi@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 天前

        Do they? As long as you use RAII and modern shit and keep to something like GCC, it should be safe, right?

        I don’t do C++ these days

      • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 天前

        Like a real powertool, if you unscrew the safety features because you feel they’re getting in your way, they no longer provide safety. Having the guard from a chainsaw in your back pocket does nothing to protect you from the chainsaw you’re holding.